February 8, 2021 - An amended complaint was filed.

September 9, 2022 - An investor in shares of YayYo, Inc. (OTC: YAYO) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by YayYo, Inc. in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made in connection with YayYo’s November 2019 initial public offering (the “IPO”).

Beverly Hills, CA based YayYo, Inc., through its subsidiaries, engages in developing vehicle rental platform in the United States.

On or about November 14, 2019, YayYo, Inc. sold about 2.6 million shares of stock in its initial public stock offering (the IPO ), at $4.00 a share raising nearly $ 10.5 million in new capital. However, since the IPO, YayYo, Inc. shares declined to as low as $0.20 per share on July 08, 2020.

According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of YayYo, Inc. (OTC: YAYO) common shares, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws.

More specifically, the plaintiff claims that the Registration Statement featured false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that the defendant El-Batrawi continued to exercise supervision, authority, and control over YayYo, and was intimately involved, on a day-to-day basis, with the business, operations, and finances of the Company, including assisting the Underwriter Defendants in marketing YayYo's IPO, that the defendant El-Batrawi never sold the 12,525,000 “Private Shares” and continued to own a controlling interest in YayYo despite the NASDAQ’s insistence that he retain less than a 10% equity ownership interest in connection with the listing agreement, that the defendants promised certain creditors of YayYo that in exchange to their agreeing to purchase shares in the IPO – in order to permit the Underwriter defendants to close the IPO – YayYo would repurchase those shares after the IPO, tha the defendants intended to repurchase shares purchased by creditors of YayYo in the IPO using IPO proceeds, that the YayYo owed its former President, CEO, and Director a half of million dollars at the time of the IPO, that the YayYo owed SRAX, Inc. (formerly Social Reality, Inc.) $426,286 in unpaid social media costs, most of which was more than a year overdue as payment had been delayed while YayYo attempted to complete its IPO, and that as a result, defendants’ statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.