Commitment and Contingencies
|9 Months Ended|
Sep. 30, 2021
|Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]|
|Commitments and Contingencies||COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
The Company is party to various negotiations and legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business. The Company provides reserves for these matters when a loss is probable and reasonably estimable. The Company does not disclose a range of potential loss because the likelihood of such a loss is remote. In the opinion of management, the ultimate disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, cash flows or liquidity.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (“FMVSS”) Certification and Other Regulatory Matters
On September 22, 2021, we announced the Company decided to suspend deliveries of C-1000 vehicles and recall the 41 vehicles we have already delivered to customers. The new leadership team determined additional testing and modifications to existing vehicles are required to bring the C-1000 vehicles into full compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (“FMVSS”). The Company further announced we filed a report with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) regarding the need for additional testing and vehicle modifications to bring our C-1000 vehicles into full compliance with FMVSS. We indicated our previous statements related to the C-1000’s compliance with NHTSA standards cannot be relied upon and so notified the Securities and Exchange Commission. We also disclosed we identified a number of enhancements to our production process and the design of the C-1000 vehicles to address customer feedback, primarily related to payload capacity.
In connection with the Company's recall of 41 previously delivered C-1000 vehicles, the Company estimates that 27 of the vehicles will be repaired or retrofitted at the Company's cost and delivered back to the customer. The remaining 14 vehicles are expected to be returned to the Company and the Company will process a full refund to the customer.
Due to the uncertainties and many variables involved in NHTSA matters, we cannot estimate the ultimate resolution of this matter and whether it will have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial position, results of operations, cash flows or liquidity. We are cooperating with NHTSA with respect to the recall of the outstanding vehicles, however, we cannot assure
that NHTSA or other government authorities will not attempt to impose potentially significant fines and penalties in response to the recall.
On October 19 and November 1, 2021, the Company received letters from the SEC requesting that it voluntarily provide information relating to (a) the events and trading in its securities leading up to the announcement of the award of a contract by the U.S. Postal Service for the manufacture of a postal service vehicle fleet and (b) recognition of revenue, if any, related to purchases of vehicles by certain of the Company’s customers. On November 5, 2021, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) orally informed the Company that it has a related open investigation covering the Company. The Company has not received any subpoena or other request for documents from the DOJ with respect to this investigation. The Company is cooperating with the SEC and DOJ investigations. At this point, the Company cannot predict the eventual scope, duration, or outcome of these matters.
During the second quarter of 2021, the Company became aware of an issue regarding our E-Series vehicles that will require retrofitting of such vehicles. Management continues to work on remediation and does not expect the issue to have a material impact on the Company's financial condition and operations.
As previously disclosed in our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2021, on March 8, 2021, Sam Farrar, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated purchasers of the Company’s securities, filed a putative class action complaint against the Company, Duane Hughes and Steve Schrader in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (Case 2:21-cv-02072) claiming violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On March 11, 2021, John Kinney, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated purchasers of the Company’s securities, filed a substantively identical putative class action complaint against the Company, Duane Hughes and Steve Schrader in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (Case 2:21-cv-02207) also claiming violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On May 18, 2021, the Court consolidated the two cases and appointed Timothy M. Weis as lead plaintiff pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. On July 16, 2021, lead plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. The Amended Complaint is now brought against the Company, Duane Hughes, Steve Schrader, Robert Willison and Gregory Ackerson, on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s securities from March 10, 2020 through May 10, 2021. It alleges that the defendants violated the federal securities laws by intentionally or recklessly making material misrepresentations and/or omissions regarding the Company’s participation in the bidding process to manufacture the new fleet of United States Postal Service (“USPS”) next generation delivery vehicles, the prospect of the USPS awarding the contract to Workhorse given alleged deficiencies in Workhorse’s proposal, the Company’s manufacturing abilities generally and the Company’s nonbinding “backlog” in its vehicles. Lead plaintiff seeks certification of a class and monetary damages in an indeterminate amount. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint on September 3, 2021. The plaintiffs filed a response to the Company’s motion to dismiss on October 18, 2021, and the Company’s reply brief is due on November 12, 2021. The hearing on the Motion is set for December 6, 2021. The Company believes the Amended Complaint is without merit and intends to vigorously pursue all legal avenues to fully defend itself.
Fiduciary Duty Litigation
As previously disclosed in our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2021, on April 16, 2021, Romario St. Clair, derivatively on behalf of the Company, filed a stockholder derivative complaint in the Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada in and for Clark County (Case No. A-21-833050-B) for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment against Duane Hughes, Steve Schrader, Stephen Fleming, Robert Willison, Anthony Furey, H. Benjamin Samuels, Raymond J. Chess, Harry DeMott, Gerald B. Budde, Pamela S. Mader, Michael L. Clark and Jacqueline A. Dedo. In this action, the plaintiff alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by allowing or causing the Company to violate the federal securities laws as alleged in the Amended Complaint discussed above and by selling Company stock and receiving other compensation while allegedly in possession of material non-public information about the prospect of the USPS awarding the contract to an electric vehicle manufacturer given that electrifying the USPS’s entire fleet allegedly would be impractical and expensive. The plaintiff seeks damages and disgorgement in an indeterminate amount. Several nearly identical derivative complaints have been filed: (1) on May 19, 2021, Caruso v. Hughes et al. (Case No. 2:21-cv-04202) was filed in the Central District of California; (2) on May 24, 2021, Kistenmacher v. Hughes et al. (Case No. 2:21-cv-04294) was filed in the Central District of California; (3) on May 27, 2021, Brown v. Hughes et al. (Case No. 2:21-cv-04412) was filed in the Central District of California; (4) on June 24, 2021 Everson v. Hughes et al. (Case No. A-21-836888-B) was filed in the Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada in and for Clark County; and (5) on September 21, 2021, Cohen v. Hughes et al. (Case No.
1:21-cv-00601) was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. On June 21, 2021, the Court ordered that the three cases filed in the Central District of California be consolidated and the parties file a proposed scheduling order within sixty days. On September 20, 2021, the Court in the Central District of California granted the parties’ stipulation, staying the case pending the outcome of the case discussed in the previous paragraph. On November 4, 2021, the Court in the Southern District of Ohio issued an order extending the defendants' deadline to respond to the Complaint until December 14, 2021, and, on November 5, 2021, the Court granted the parties' stipulation transferring the case to the Central District of California. Although these claims purport to seek recovery on behalf of the Company, the Company will incur certain expenses due to indemnification and advancement obligations with respect to the defendants. The Company understands that defendants believe this action is without merit and intends to support them as they pursue all legal avenues to defend themselves fully.
Litigation Related to the United States Postal Service Award
On June 16, 2021, the Company filed a bid protest against the United States in the United States Court of Federal Claims (Case No. 21-cv-1484C) in connection with the USPS award of the contract for its Next Generation Delivery Vehicle to Oshkosh Defense, LLC (“Oshkosh”) claiming that the USPS failed to conduct meaningful discussions with the Company pertaining to its alleged proposal deficiencies, the USPS unequally, arbitrarily and prejudicially evaluated the proposals and the USPS’s arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable evaluation of the Company’s proposal breached an implied-in-fact contract with the Company to consider its proposal fairly. The Company requested an entry of judgment in favor of the Company, an entry of a declaratory judgment that the award to Oshkosh was unlawful and improper and an injunction directing the award be terminated, and directing the USPS to reevaluate the proposals and to conduct a new best value determination. On July 6, 2021, the United States and Oshkosh, as Defendant-Intervenor, filed a Motion to Dismiss requesting that the Company’s complaint be dismissed with prejudice due to the Company’s alleged failure to exhaust USPS’s mandatory administrative dispute resolution process. On July 20, 2021, the Company filed an Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss claiming that the USPS process is outside of the congressional authorization and the pursuit of the USPS’ dispute resolution process would have been futile. On September 15, 2021, the Company withdrew its bid protest filed in the United States Court of Federal Claims.
The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef