According to the Zhitong Finance App, Yida China (03639.HK) issued an announcement that the company's subsidiaries Rongtai Company and Zhengzhou Yida failed to repay the principal amount and corresponding interest of the Northern Trust loan. Recently, the company's subsidiary received a “Civil Complaint” from Northern Trust (plaintiff) against Rongtai (defendant 1, borrower, mortgagee), Zhengzhou Yida (defendant 2, co-payer, mortgagor), Dalian Software Park Rongyuan Development Co., Ltd. (defendant 3, mortgagor), and Dalian Jiadao Technology Development Co., Ltd. (defendant 4, mortgagee) served by the Tianjin Second Intermediate People's Court. The plaintiff requested an order: (i) Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 to settle the principal amount of the loan of approximately RMB 482 million and corresponding interest, penalties, and liquidated damages up to September 21, 2025; (ii) the plaintiff was entitled to preferential payment of collateral provided by each mortgagee within the agreed collateral amount within the agreed collateral amount; and (iii) Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 were responsible for the expenses incurred by the plaintiff in fulfilling their claims.

According to the Zhitong Finance App, Yida China (03639.HK) issued an announcement that the company's subsidiaries Rongtai Company and Zhengzhou Yida failed to repay the principal amount and corresponding interest of the Northern Trust loan. Recently, the company's subsidiary received a “Civil Complaint” from Northern Trust (plaintiff) against Rongtai (defendant 1, borrower, mortgagee), Zhengzhou Yida (defendant 2, co-payer, mortgagor), Dalian Software Park Rongyuan Development Co., Ltd. (defendant 3, mortgagor), and Dalian Jiadao Technology Development Co., Ltd. (defendant 4, mortgagee) served by the Tianjin Second Intermediate People's Court. The plaintiff requested an order: (i) Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 to settle the principal amount of the loan of approximately RMB 482 million and corresponding interest, penalties, and liquidated damages up to September 21, 2025; (ii) the plaintiff was entitled to preferential payment of collateral provided by each mortgagee within the agreed collateral amount within the agreed collateral amount; and (iii) Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 were responsible for the expenses incurred by the plaintiff in fulfilling their claims.