Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 11/29/2018 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: November 26, 2018

According to the Complaint, PPDAI Group Inc. is an online P2P consumer finance company in China and the first online consumer finance marketplace in China connecting borrowers and investors whose needs are unserved or underserved by traditional financial institutions.

The Complaint alleges that Defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) PPDAI was engaged in predatory lending practices that saddled subprime borrowers and those with poor or limited credit histories with high interest rate debt they could not repay; (2) many of PPDAI’s customers were using PPDAI-provided loans to repay existing loans they otherwise could not afford to repay, thereby inflating PPDAI’s revenues and active borrower numbers and increasing the likelihood of defaults; (3) PPDAI was experiencing increasing delinquency rates, negatively affecting PPDAI’s reserves; (4) PPDAI’s purported “rapid growth” in the number and amount of loans had materially dropped off; (5) PPDAI was providing online loans to college students despite a government ban on the practice; (6) PPDAI was engaged in overly aggressive and improper collection practices; and (7) as a result of its improper lending, underwriting, and collection practices, PPDAI was subject to heightened risk of adverse actions by Chinese regulators.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Misc. Financial Services
Headquarters: China

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: PPDF
Company Market: New York SE
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: E.D. New York
DOCKET #: 18-CV-06716
JUDGE: Hon. Ann M Donnelly
DATE FILED: 11/26/2018
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/13/2017
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/26/2018
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New York)
    350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5508, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New York), NY 10118
    212.686.1060 212.202.3827 · lrosen@rosenlegal.com
No Document Title Filing Date
—Reference Complaint Complaint Related Data is not available
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available