Published on August 22nd, 2019 |
by Johnna Crider
August 22nd, 2019 by Johnna Crider
Get some coffee, because it's going to be a long, detailed read. In fact, you may just want to move the coffee pot to your living room (or wherever you read it) and enjoy.
However, if we go back in time, we can see that Walmart's lawsuit against Tesla is pretty much a defense move – not the offense that many at first glance seem to think. In fact, Walmart seems small. Let me explain.
On August 20, 2019, Tesla filed a Breach and Demand for Cure Notice at the New York County Clerk's office. This was before Walmart decided to sue Tesla. The document was dated July 27, 2019, yet it was officially filed a month later.
"I am writing to comply with the notice of infringement and request that Tesla be sent to Walmart," the document begins. Read on for a quick break down the important takes from the document.
"Material Violations of Walmart Agreements"
Tesla installed, maintained, and operated 248 solar energy systems on the roof of 248 Walmart stores. These systems are under a contract (Power Power & Services Agreement or something similar).
Every system has a contract. Some may have specific terms that differ, but each has the same general point: Tesla supplies and maintains systems and is paid by Walmart for the use of the equipment or power it generates.
Walmart violated that contract, according to Tesla. The 244 systems are offline because Walmart does not honor the agreement, according to Tesla's claim. Tesla says it has tried to accommodate Walmart's delays, unreasonable demands, and shift positions. In other words, the implication is that Walmart is making excuses and dragging it down.
"It is not necessary or realistic to attempt to document all of Walmart's violations, misconduct, or misconduct in a letter. However, we will review the course of conduct to ensure that Walmart is noticed by the alleged contrary. here's Tesla, "the company wrote. Here is a summary of more information from Tesla's detailed letter:
1. "The Rooftop Solar Photovoltaic Systems"
Tesla started operating systems around September 2010, and over the 7 years, numbers have been added to 248 systems. Each system passes local inspections and is authorized to operate. Between 2010 and March of 2018, they together generated over 600,000 MWh of electricity.
2. "Without Contractual Obligation, Walmart Concerns Concerned After Unrelated Thermal Events in spring of 2018"
In March and May of 2018 , Beavercreek, OH, and Indio, CA, Walmarts experienced no related thermal roofing events. . After these two fires, Walmart made the request that Tesla de-energize other systems on their sites even without any history of thermal events and did not pose a risk or danger – from thermal events or others.
Walmart does not have the Right to demand that unaffected systems be strengthened. However, Tesla has come out to submit to the demands of an important customer. Tesla also agreed to inspect each system to make sure any issues are taken care of – at their own expense. Tesla and its investors are paid based on the energy generated by the systems.
3. "Walmart Causes Delays by Reneging on First Inspection Protocol"
What does it mean for Walmart to delay the inspection process – over and over again. An example of this is that both parties agree to a protocol but Walmart does not cooperate with Tesla regarding inspection or reports. It also did not comment.
Walmart also hired two consultants and demanded that the protocol be changed along with its input. It lasted months while a new protocol was agreed upon and finally an agreement was reached in December 2018
4. "Walmart caused delays by implementing the extra-Contractual Conditions in the Re- Energization, by refusing to provide Feedback on Inspection Reports, by Failing to Pay its Consultant and by Failure to Submit "
In December, both agreed that Tesla would complete tests using the new protocol. The following month, Tesla reviewed reports with advisors and they all agreed that all criteria were met for each site. Tesla demanded that the sites be revitalized. But, instead, Walmart invited Tesla to its headquarters to discuss the re-energization and plans to keep up with the growth of the parties made last year.
What this means is that Walmart has changed its mind about something else – it has changed this agreement only agreed to and wanted by others: for Tesla to pay for damages on three sites, compensation to attorneys obtained, and consulting fees.
If Tesla didn't pay for it. fee, Walmart will not comment on Tesla's request to revitalize the site, including the site without issue.
Common: Walmart asks third parties to join and view plans. They did, all parties agreed, and when Tesla wanted to revitalize the systems, Walmart said, "Not unless we give you the money."
5. "Walmart's Belated and New Demand Re-Energization of 248 Systems Waiting for Further" Root Cause "Reviewed for 2 (or Probably 4) Systems"  Walmart insists that none of the 248 systems can be reinstated until Tesla provides root cause. This means Tesla will have to investigate why the two panels were caught, and until they find out what started them, Walmart will keep all systems offline. , which makes more demands, suddenly looks happy, and then suddenly becomes dissatisfied while making other new demands at random.
Tesla bends back for Walmart. Tesla went through all nine regarding ensuring that each of the 248 roof systems was safe. Tesla also came out to make sure Walmart was satisfied.
Tesla suffered from doing so, though. There were costs and losses, but that was okay because it wanted to make sure Walmart was satisfied. One thing Tesla did not do was renounce its rights under the contracts. Tesla did its part, but Walmart refused to revive the systems.
Walmart is still trying to delay it and now the high-profile lawsuit is actually another delay. Tesla writes:
"The only obstacles to reinvigorating the 30 sites that were inspected were (a) Walmart insisting that its consultant should first be sent to verify the reports before taking any concrete steps to do so, and (b) Walmart's repeated practice of imposing unreasonable, excessive contractual conditions and re-energizing concessions. Tesla is certain that if Walmart truly reviews the inspections sites, it will know its concerns have been eliminated. But Walmart refuses to look even. Walmart can't claim to violate sites that have not been inspected, agreeing to an inspection protocol as a way to cure , and then proceed with the claim of infringement because it refuses to confirm that the cure requirements are satisfied. ntrata is Walmart itself. "
In other words, Walmart is playing – cost-effective games for Tesla and its investors.