Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Courts

Walmart Reaches Settlement With Tesla Over Solar Panel Fires, Drops Lawsuit (techcrunch.com) 42

Walmart has dropped a lawsuit that accused Tesla of breach of contract and gross negligence after rooftop solar panel systems on seven of the retailer's stores allegedly caught fire. TechCrunch reports: A settlement has been reached and stipulation of dismissal has been filed with the court, a Walmart spokesperson said in an email. It is unclear what the settlement entails. TechCrunch has requested more information and will update the article if new details emerge. The two companies issued a joint release Tuesday announcing that the issues raised by Walmart have been resolved. "Safety is a top priority for each company and with the concerns being addressed, we both look forward to a safe re-energization of our sustainable energy systems," the emailed statement reads.

Walmart said it sued Tesla after years of gross negligence and failure to live up to industry standards by Tesla, according to court documents. Walmart asked Tesla to remove solar panels from all 240 locations where they have been installed, as well as pay for damages related to fires that the retailer alleges stem from the panels. The lawsuit points to several fires on the retailer's rooftops that allegedly stem from Tesla solar panels.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Walmart Reaches Settlement With Tesla Over Solar Panel Fires, Drops Lawsuit

Comments Filter:
  • Tesla needs to be careful with solar reflections focusing in on particular locales with dried up refuse. Panels are shiny and quite reflective.

    • So, in other words, you're letting us know that Tesla was able to prove to Walmart that Walmart's own employees probably started the fires either on purpose or on accident by leaving discarded lunch break trash around the solar panels, in direct violation of the safe operating instructions that were explicitly communicated to Walmart management? Is that what you're saying? Because it pretty much sounds like that's what you're saying, only you're trying to spin it like it's someone else's fault.

    • And flat. So how do they focus anything? And aimed, usually, in an upward direction. So where do the reflections go?
  • Such a lawsuit would be bad publicity for Tesla. They are a luxury brand, and the well-to-do expect quality. It seems at first they had a hunch they could possibly win, but realized the publicity angle was more powerful than the monetary angle of the lawsuit.

    • Win or lose, it's a huge platter of egg on the face of both these companies if they really had to remove the solar installations from 240 stores over 7 of them catching fire due to gross negligence for which nobody could actually be proven to be directly responsible. Cooler heads prevailed and could see that this is childish behavior and blatant scapegoating, probably instigated by disgruntled employees angry that their favorite smoking spot was now cluttered with solar panels.

      • until we hear what the settlement terms were your statement seems a little silly. For all we know Tesla have acknowledged fault and agreed to pay all costs to avoid the court case. 7 out of 240 catching fire is a MASSIVE catastrophic failure rate.
        • Yea, or obvious sabotage, one or the other. What I want to know is if these stores were all mysteriously clustered in the same corner of some backwoods red state with a ton of old oil money families living on the surrounding private lands.

  • by jfdavis668 ( 1414919 ) on Tuesday November 05, 2019 @09:19PM (#59385424)
    These Walmart installations were done by Solar City prior to their purchase by Tesla. Yes, Tesla is now responsible, but they did not do the initial installation.
    • by viperidaenz ( 2515578 ) on Tuesday November 05, 2019 @09:35PM (#59385450)

      Yes, however Elon Musk was the largest shareholder and chairman of SolarCity before the acquisition and the company was run by his cousins.

      • Okay and? A shareholder isn't someone who dictates day to day policy within a company. That's what the operational officers are there for. Shareholders can oust the current officers but that's typically post-facto. I'm not trying to absolve blame but I am saying, there's a bit of reality checking that's necessary here. Does any one like micromanagers? Does any company with a majority of micromanagers succeed? C'mon this "let's blame Elon" mentality is just unrealistic on anything we'd assume to be a

    • It would make no sense to talk about solar city in this article since people would simply wonder why a company that no longer exists can somehow reach a settlement.

      Solarcity is Tesla, both now, and as part of the acquisition for their entire history. Due diligence done during acquisition involves checking what kind of liabilities you are buying.

  • Tesla blamed Amphenol H4 connectors, Amphenol denied that their products had anything to do with the fires. Do we know who was right?

  • by jfdavis668 ( 1414919 ) on Tuesday November 05, 2019 @10:15PM (#59385546)
    Since the stated goal of both Tesla and Solar City is to improve the world, maybe burning down Walmarts was a means to an end.
  • Settlement secrecy Often facilitates expediency but at the expense of sharing potentially useful experience for minimizing risks in future endeavors. Electrical fires occur in non solar facilities as well. But public now unlikely find out the root causes.

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Working...