NEW YORK, Jan. 28, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been commenced on behalf of stockholders of Arrival SA ( ARVL), Faraday Future Intelligent Electric, Inc. ( FFIE), FirstCash Holdings, Inc. ( FCFS), and Bright Health Group, Inc. (: BHG). Stockholders have until the deadlines below to petition the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about each case can be found at the link provided.
Arrival SA ( ARVL)
Class Period: November 18, 2020 – November 19, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 22, 2022
On November 8, 2021, Arrival announced the Company’s financial results for the third quarter of 2021, including a loss of €26 million, and adjusted EBITDA loss for the quarter of €40 million. The Company also significantly scaled back its long-term projections, pushing its production and sales timelines into later time periods.
On this news, shares of Arrival plummeted $4.33, or 24%, to close at $13.46 on November 10, 2021.
Only a week later, on November 17, 2021, Arrival announced a $200 million offering of green convertible senior notes due 2026, intended to finance the development of EVs. On the same day, November 17, 2021, Arrival announced the commencement of an underwritten public offering of 25 million ordinary shares pursuant to a registration statement on Form F-1 filed with the SEC in a bid to raise around $330 million in cash.
On this news, Arrival shares again dropped $0.82, or approximately 8%, to close at $9.91 on November 18, 2021.
The Complaint alleges Arrival made false and misleading statements to the public throughout the Class Period and failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operational, and financial prospects. Specifically, Arrival made false and/or misleading statements concerning: (i) the Company would record a substantially greater net loss and adjusted EBITDA loss in the third quarter of 2021 compared to the third quarter of 2020; (ii) the Company would experience far greater capital and operational expenses required to operate and deploy its microfactories and manufacture EVs than disclosed; (iii) the Company would not capitalize on or achieve profitability or provide meaningful revenue in the time periods disclosed; (iv) the Company would not achieve its production and sales volumes; (v) the Company would not meet the disclosed production rollout deadlines; (vi) accordingly, the Company materially overstated its financial and operational position and/or prospects; and (vii) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
For more information on the Arrival class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/ARVL
Faraday Future Intelligent Electric, Inc. ( FFIE)
Class Period: January 28, 2021 – November 15, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: February 22, 2022
On October 7, 2021, J Capital Research published a report alleging, among other things, that Faraday Future was unlikely to ever sell a car, noting that after eight years in business, the Company has “failed to deliver a car,” “has reneged on promises to build factories in five localities in the U.S. and China,” “is being sued by dozens of unpaid suppliers,” and “has failed to disclose that assets in China have been frozen by courts.” Moreover, the report alleged that Faraday Future’s claimed 14,000 deposits are fabricated because 78% of these reservations were made by a single undisclosed company that is likely an affiliate. The report further alleges that contrary to representations of progress toward manufacturing made by Faraday Future in September 2021, former engineering executives did not believe that the car was ready for production.
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $0.35 per share, or more than 4%, to close at $8.05 per share on October 8, 2021.
On November 15, 2021, Faraday Future announced that it would be unable to file its Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2021 on time. Faraday Future further announced that its board of directors “formed a special committee of independent directors to review allegations of inaccurate disclosures,” including the claims in the J Capital report.
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $0.28 per share, or approximately 3%, to close at $8.83 per share on November 16, 2021.
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company had assets in China frozen by courts, (2) that a significant percentage of its deposits for future deliveries were attributable to a single undisclosed affiliate; (3) that the Company’s cars were not as close to production as the Company claimed; (4) that, as a result of previously issued statements that were misleading and/or inaccurate, Faraday Future could not timely file its quarterly report; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
For more information on the Faraday class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/FFIE
FirstCash Holdings, Inc. ( FCFS)
Class Period: February 1, 2018 – November 12, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 15, 2022
In September 2016, the Company, then known as First Cash Financial Services Inc., finalized its merger with pawnshop provider and payday lender Cash America International, Inc. (“Cash America”). Following the merger, the combined company changed its name to FirstCash Inc. Similarly, following a December 2021 merger with lending company American First Finance, the Company again changed its name to FirstCash Holdings, Inc.
The Military Lending Act (“MLA”) provides protections for active-duty service members and their dependents in connection with the extension of consumer credit. Among other protections, the MLA limits the interest rates that may be charged on consumer loans to active-duty armed forces members and their covered dependents to no more than 36%. Further, the MLA prohibits lenders from requiring covered parties to submit to arbitration, as well as imposing other limitations.
In November 2013, Cash America entered into a Consent Order with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) for making loans to covered members of the military or their dependents in violation of the MLA, violations relating to debt collection, failure to prevent or timely detect problematic conduct due to inadequate internal compliance, and failure to maintain required records (the “Order”). In the Order, Cash America agreed to cease and desist from the violations and to implement a plan designed to ensure its future compliance with the terms of the Order. The CFPB fined Cash America $5 million and ordered it to deposit $8 million into an account in order to provide redress to affected consumers.
In 2015, the Department of Defense expanded the MLA to cover more credit products, including pawn loans. Newly covered creditors, which included pawn brokers, had until October 3, 2016 to bring their operations into compliance with the new rules.
In response to the expansion of the MLA, which prohibited the Company from issuing loans with interest rates higher than 36%, FirstCash claimed that it was “unable to offer any of its current credit products, including pawn loans, to members of the U.S. military or their dependents.” The Company also claimed throughout the Class Period that it employed robust systems, policies, and procedures to ensure its regulatory compliance and adherence to applicable laws, rules and regulations governing its business, including the MLA.
Despite these assurances, unbeknownst to investors throughout the Class Period, FirstCash was engaged in widespread and systemic violations of the MLA and had made thousands of loans to active-duty service members and their dependents at usurious rates. On November 12, 2021, the CFPB filed a lawsuit alleging that FirstCash and its subsidiary, Cash America West, Inc., had violated the MLA by charging higher than the allowable 36% annual percentage rate on over 3,600 pawn loans to more than 1,000 active-duty service members and their dependents. The CFPB also alleged that FirstCash had violated the 2013 CFPB Order prohibiting future MLA violations, which remained in effect and applied to FirstCash following the September 2016 merger of the Company and First Cash America
As a result of these revelations, the price of FirstCash stock plummeted over $7 per share, or 8%, in a single day to close at $78.64 per share on November 12, 2021 on abnormally high trading volume. The stock continued to fall in subsequent days as the market digested the news, dropping another $10 per share by November 18, 2021.
For more information on the FirstCash class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/FCFS
Bright Health Group, Inc. (: BHG)
Class Period: June 24, 2021 IPO; June 24, 2021 – November 10, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 7, 2022
In June 2021, Bright Health completed its initial public offering (“IPO”), selling approximately 51 million shares of common stock for $18.00 per share.
On November 11, 2021, Bright Health reported its third quarter financial results, revealing earnings per share (“EPS”) of -$0.48 as calculated under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), missing consensus estimates by $0.31. The Company also reported a sharp rise in the Company’s medical cost ratio (“MCR”), advising investors that its MCR “for the third quarter of 2021 was 103.0%, including a 540 basis point unfavorable impact from COVID-19 related costs and a 900 basis point unfavorable impact primarily from a cumulative reduction in premium revenue due to an inability to capture risk adjustment on newly added lives.”
On this news, Bright Health’s stock fell $2.36, or 32%, to close at $4.94 per share on November 11, 2021, thereby injuring investors.
For more information on the Bright Health class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/BHG
About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York, California, and South Carolina. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Alexandra B. Raymond, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
[email protected]
www.bespc.com
