The Stakes When an Investor Backs Out After Term Sheet

For India’s dynamic consumer goods sector, particularly direct-to-consumer (D2C) and fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) companies, private placement funding is a cornerstone for growth, innovation, and market expansion. A term sheet in a private placement deal serves as a critical milestone, outlining key investment terms and signaling mutual intent to proceed. It sets the stage for due diligence and definitive agreements like Share Subscription Agreements. However, when an investor backs out after term sheet, the fallout can disrupt financial plans, delay strategic initiatives, and erode market credibility. This article, informed by expertise from firms like LawCrust, a leading legal services provider in India, explores the legal, financial, and strategic implications of investor withdrawal funding and offers actionable remedies for senior leaders to safeguard their deals.

Legal Effect of Term Sheet in Private Placement: What Happens When Private Placement Deals Fall Through and Investor Backs Out After Term Sheet

When an investor backs out after term sheet, understanding the legal effect of term sheet is critical. In India, term sheets in private placements are generally non-binding regarding the investment itself, meaning they express intent without creating an enforceable obligation to fund. This is governed by the Indian Contract Act, 1872, which views term sheets as preliminary agreements unless specific clauses are explicitly binding. Common enforceable clauses include:

• Confidentiality: Protects sensitive data shared during due diligence.
• Exclusivity/No-Shop: Prevents the company from engaging other investors for a set period.
• Dispute Resolution: Specifies jurisdiction and methods for resolving disputes.

These clauses, if breached, allow claims for damages under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act. For instance, if an investor misuses confidential data post-withdrawal, companies can seek legal recourse. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), under the SEBI (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2018, governs private placements but does not directly address term sheet enforceability. However, cases like Edelweiss Financial Services v. Percept Finserve Pvt. Ltd. (2019) show courts may uphold specific performance for binding clauses if intent and reliance are clear. Partnering with legal experts like LawCrust ensures term sheets are drafted to maximise enforceability and deter investor reneging term sheet risks.

1. Why Investors Renege After Signing

Understanding why an investor backs out after term sheet is essential for risk mitigation. Common reasons include:

• Due Diligence Red Flags: Post-signing due diligence may reveal issues like overstated revenues, regulatory non-compliance, or weak supply chains, prompting investor withdrawal funding. For D2C firms, discrepancies in customer acquisition costs or retention metrics are frequent triggers.
• Internal Investment Committee Objections: Venture capital (VC) or private equity (PE) firms may face internal pushback. Post-2024 market corrections, investment committees have adopted stricter risk assessments, leading to investor exit private deal scenarios.
• Market Volatility: Economic shifts, such as rising interest rates or FMCG demand slowdowns in 2024, can make investors reconsider commitments, fearing lower returns.
• Valuation Disputes: Disagreements over valuation post-term sheet, especially if market comps shift, can lead to an investor backs out after term sheet outcome.
• Portfolio Strategy Shifts: Investors may redirect capital to other opportunities or sectors, causing investor reneging term sheet decisions.

Rigorous pre-vetting and transparent communication can reduce these risks, ensuring alignment before signing.

2. Implications for the Company

When an investor backs out after term sheet, the consequences for consumer goods companies, particularly smaller D2C or FMCG firms, can be severe:

• Reputational Damage: A withdrawn investment signals instability, deterring future investors and eroding brand trust in competitive D2C markets.
• Wasted Due Diligence Efforts: Legal, financial, and operational due diligence costs (often ₹50-100 lakhs for mid-sized firms) are lost, diverting resources from core operations.
• Deal Delay Costs: Funding delays stall product launches, marketing campaigns, or ERP upgrades, impacting revenue and market positioning.
• Internal Disruption: Uncertainty affects team morale and strategic plans, with smaller firms lacking the financial buffer to absorb such shocks.

These impacts underscore the need for proactive measures to mitigate private placement funding risks.

3. Strategic & Legal Remedies

To address investor backs out after term sheet scenarios, companies can adopt the following strategies:

• Deterrent Clauses: Include reverse breakup fees (2-5% of investment) or earnest deposits to discourage unwarranted exits. These clauses provide financial recourse if an investor withdraws without cause.
• Legal Action: Pursue damages for breaches of binding clauses (e.g., exclusivity) under the Indian Contract Act. While specific performance for funding is rare, legal notices can deter repeat investor exit private deal incidents. Firms like LawCrust can guide enforceable clause drafting.
• Reputational Recourse: Discreetly leverage industry networks to highlight unreliable investor behavior, discouraging future investor reneging term sheet actions, while avoiding reputational harm to the company.
• Rigorous Investor Vetting: Conduct background checks on investors’ track records, engaging portfolio companies to assess reliability. Short exclusivity periods (30-45 days) balance commitment and flexibility.
• Customised Term Sheets: Work with legal experts to customise term sheets with milestone-linked conditions, reducing ambiguity and exit risks.

4. Hybrid Consulting Viewpoint

A multi-disciplinary approach mitigates investor backs out after term sheet risks:

• Financial: Secure bridge financing (e.g., venture debt from Alteria Capital) to cover cash flow gaps. Revise projections to reflect delays and maintain liquidity.
• Legal: Draft milestone-linked term sheets with clear conditions precedent, ensuring enforceable clauses via firms like LawCrust.
• Management: Communicate transparently with teams and stakeholders to maintain morale and operational focus.
• Tech: Use investor CRM systems (e.g., HubSpot) to track interactions and flag investors with a history of investor withdrawal funding tendencies.

Conclusion

When an investor backs out after term sheet, consumer goods companies face significant challenges, from reputational damage to operational delays. By understanding the legal effect of term sheet clauses, anticipating reasons for investor reneging term sheet, and implementing deterrent clauses, legal recourse, and rigorous vetting, leaders can safeguard private placement funding. A hybrid approach blending financial preparedness, legal precision, management clarity, and tech-driven insights ensures resilience. Partnering with experts like LawCrust enhances term sheet robustness, enabling companies to navigate investor exit private deal risks and sustain growth.

About LawCrust

LawCrust Global Consulting Ltd. delivers cutting-edge Hybrid Consulting Solutions in Management, Finance, Technology, and Legal Consulting to ambitious businesses worldwide. Recognised for our cross-functional expertise and hybrid consulting approach, we empower startups, SMEs, and enterprises to scale efficiently, innovate boldly, and navigate complexity with confidence. Our services span key areas such as Investment Banking, Fundraising, Mergers & Acquisitions, Private Placement, and Debt Restructuring & Transformation, positioning us as a strategic partner for growth and resilience. With an integrated consulting model, fixed-cost engagements, and a virtual delivery framework, we make business transformation accessible, agile, and impactful.

For expert legal help, please contact us:

• Email: inquiry@lawcrustbusiness.com