Ebix investors may receive additional information about the case by clicking the link "Submit Your Information" above.
Ebix supplies infrastructure exchanges to the insurance, financial, travel, cash remittances, and healthcare industries.
The Class Period commences on November 9, 2020, when Ebix filed its quarterly report for the period ended September 30, 2020 on a Form 10-Q with the SEC, stating in relevant part that the “Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our ‘disclosure controls and procedures’ . . . [and] have concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures are effective.”
On February 19, 2021, after the market closed, Ebix revealed that its independent auditor, RSM US LLP (“RSM”), resigned “as a result of being unable, despite repeated inquiries, to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that would allow it to evaluate the business purpose of significant unusual transactions that occurred in the fourth quarter of 2020” related to Ebix’s gift card business in India. RSM also stated that there was a material weakness related to Ebix’s failure to design controls “over the gift or prepaid card revenue transaction cycle sufficient to prevent or detect a material misstatement.” Additionally, Ebix and RSM disagreed over the accounting treatment of $30 million that had been transferred into a commingled trust account of Ebix’s outside legal counsel in December 2020.
Following this news, Ebix’s share price fell $20.24, or approximately 40%, to close at $30.50 on February 22, 2021.
The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, the defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) there was insufficient audit evidence to determine the business purpose of certain significant unusual transactions in Ebix’s gift card business in India during the fourth quarter of 2020; (2) there was a material weakness in Ebix’s internal control over the gift or prepaid revenue transaction cycle; (3) Ebix’s independent auditor, RSM, was reasonably likely to resign over disagreements with Ebix regarding $30 million that had been transferred into a commingled trust account of Ebix’s outside legal counsel; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, the defendants’ positive statements about Ebix’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
If you are a member of the class described above, you may no later than April 23, 2021 move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class, if you so choose.
A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Filling out the online form above or communicating with any counsel is not necessary to participate or share in any recovery achieved in this case. Any member of the purported class may move the court to serve as a lead plaintiff through counsel of his/her choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an inactive class member.
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP has not filed a complaint in this matter. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP: James Maro, Esq. (484) 270-1453 or Adrienne Bell, Esq. (484) 270-1435; toll-free at (844) 887-9500; or via e-mail at info@ktmc.com. If you would like additional information about the suit, please click on the link "Submit Your Information" above and fill out the form as promptly as possible.