The case alleges that throughout the Class Period the defendants made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about Green Dot’s business, operations and prospects.
Additionally, the lawsuit also accuses the firm for its misleading statements pertaining to the company’s new internal risk policies and procedures that were negatively impacting Green Dot’s growth in new account activations amidst others.
On 26 July 2012, Green Dot disclosed that its outlook for the remainder of the year reflects "the impact of new internal risk policies and controls to improve the security and quality of [Green Dot’s] portfolio," and that the "reforecast also assumes that by later this year, many of [the Company’s] retailers will start to sell competitive GPR products in addition to [Green Dot’s] products."
Furthermore, the firm accepted that "because we lack the historical data to accurately predict how the new competition] will impact Green Dot’s sales, we have taken what we believe to be a conservative view of any potential impact."
Represented by Glancy Binkow & Goldberg, the plaintiff is seeking to recover damages on behalf of class members.
Green Dot provides widely distributed, low cost banking and payment solutions to a broad base of domestic consumers.
