Core Viewpoint - SelectQuote Inc. is under increased legal scrutiny due to a whistleblower lawsuit alleging deceptive sales practices, leading to a significant drop in its stock price and a subsequent class-action lawsuit from investors [1][2][5]. Legal Issues - The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has intervened in a lawsuit claiming SelectQuote misled investors about its business model and regulatory risks, particularly regarding its Medicare Advantage sales practices [1][4][6]. - The lawsuit, Pahlkotter v. SelectQuote Inc. et al., includes investors who purchased shares between September 9, 2020, and May 1, 2025, alleging that the company failed to disclose material risks associated with its sales practices [2][6]. Allegations of Misconduct - The complaint alleges that SelectQuote misrepresented its services as providing unbiased advice while actually directing customers towards higher-commission plans and accepting illegal kickbacks [4][8]. - The DOJ's allegations indicate that SelectQuote received tens of millions of dollars in improper payments from 2016 to 2021, which contributed to discriminatory practices against less profitable customers [4][8]. Market Reaction - Following the DOJ's involvement, SelectQuote's stock price fell nearly 20% in a single day, and shares have declined over 40% in the past six months due to investor concerns about legal exposure and reputational damage [5][6]. Investigative Actions - Hagens Berman, a shareholder rights firm, is investigating whether SelectQuote's revenue was artificially inflated through deceptive practices, emphasizing the seriousness of the DOJ's intervention [7]. - The firm is encouraging investors who suffered losses or have relevant information to come forward, highlighting the potential for whistleblower rewards under the SEC program [7][9].

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around allegations of insurance sales fraud, where a customer was misled about the terms of a life insurance policy, believing he would receive double his premiums after 15 years instead of the actual 20-year term [1][2] - The customer, Mr. Zhang, paid approximately 55,000 yuan in premiums over ten years, expecting a significant return based on verbal assurances from the insurance agent [1] - The insurance contract contained signatures that were not Mr. Zhang's or his wife's, raising further suspicions about the legitimacy of the sale [2] Group 2 - The insurance company claimed to have a recorded phone call to verify the customer's understanding of the contract, but refused to provide the original recording, leading to concerns about potential forgery [2] - The company cited customer confidentiality as a reason for not discussing the case with the media, which raises questions about transparency and accountability in the insurance industry [2] - Legal provisions exist that allow consumers to request copies of their personal information, yet the insurance company has not responded adequately to the customer's requests for evidence [2]