Hewlett-Packard claims financial improprieties from Autonomy ahead of purchase
Autonomy allegedly booked deals that were unlikely to be paid for, booked deals prematurely before they were closed, and claimed transactions where there were no end customers.
February 04, 2014 at 07:43 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Hewlett-Packard Co. has claimed that U.K. software maker Autonomy inflated its revenue and profit before HP's 2011 purchase of the company. Now, following an audit of Autonomy's 2010 financial statements, HP believes it has the ammo to prove it.
HP claims that it found financial improprieties during the audit, which examined Autonomy's 2010 and 2011 fiscal reports. The tech giant says Autonomy's 2010 revenue was lowered by 54 percent, or roughly £95 million ($156 million), when HP refiled the company's 2010 statement with Companies House, the U.K. registry of companies. HP also says the restatement showed an operating-profit decline of 81 percent.
“These restatements, and the reasons for them, are consistent with HP's previous disclosures regarding accounting improprieties in Autonomy's pre-acquisition financials,” said an HP spokesman to The Wall Street Journal. “The substantial work necessary to prepare these accounts has revealed extensive accounting errors and misrepresentations in the previously issued 2010 audited financial statements, including the problems previously identified by HP.”
A spokesman for Autonomy's former management told the WSJ it continues to reject HP's allegations.
The HP spokesman said Autonomy allegedly cooked its books through booking deals that were unlikely to be paid for, booking deals prematurely before they were closed, and claiming transactions where there were no end customers. The spokesman also claimed the company had accounting errors in the filings of certain expenses like employee commissions and bonuses.
According to HP, 2011 financial statements contained some of the same improprieties as 2010 statements. However, as those financials had not been completed and submitted to HP before the company's sale closed in October 2011.
A year after the sale, HP said it would write down the value of Autonomy by $8.8 billion. According to a spokesman at the time, about $5 billion of that figure could be attributed to the accounting irregularities.
The U.K.'s Financial Reporting Council is investigating the matter but would only say that it is continuing the investigation that it began in February 2013.
For more on the technology side of the legal biz, check out these InsideCounsel articles:
HP claims that it found financial improprieties during the audit, which examined Autonomy's 2010 and 2011 fiscal reports. The tech giant says Autonomy's 2010 revenue was lowered by 54 percent, or roughly £95 million ($156 million), when HP refiled the company's 2010 statement with Companies House, the U.K. registry of companies. HP also says the restatement showed an operating-profit decline of 81 percent.
“These restatements, and the reasons for them, are consistent with HP's previous disclosures regarding accounting improprieties in Autonomy's pre-acquisition financials,” said an HP spokesman to The Wall Street Journal. “The substantial work necessary to prepare these accounts has revealed extensive accounting errors and misrepresentations in the previously issued 2010 audited financial statements, including the problems previously identified by HP.”
A spokesman for Autonomy's former management told the WSJ it continues to reject HP's allegations.
The HP spokesman said Autonomy allegedly cooked its books through booking deals that were unlikely to be paid for, booking deals prematurely before they were closed, and claiming transactions where there were no end customers. The spokesman also claimed the company had accounting errors in the filings of certain expenses like employee commissions and bonuses.
According to HP, 2011 financial statements contained some of the same improprieties as 2010 statements. However, as those financials had not been completed and submitted to HP before the company's sale closed in October 2011.
A year after the sale, HP said it would write down the value of Autonomy by $8.8 billion. According to a spokesman at the time, about $5 billion of that figure could be attributed to the accounting irregularities.
The U.K.'s Financial Reporting Council is investigating the matter but would only say that it is continuing the investigation that it began in February 2013.
For more on the technology side of the legal biz, check out these InsideCounsel articles:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
King Kullen—the Nation's First Supermarket—Hires Outside Counsel as GC
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Leaves Statute of Limitations Question in Injury Crash Suit for a Jury
- 2Fighting Injustice: Son Secures Father's Honorable Discharge From U.S. Air Force
- 3'A Giant in the Legal Community': a Fulton County Judge Has Died
- 4Will the 9th Circuit Still be Center Stage in Trump Policy Challenges?
- 5Obtaining Reimbursement from Medicaid
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250