[RedBarchetta]

Some companies hold true to the mindset that contracts are meant to be broken. They then short pay on invoices, claim late deliveries or other nuisances to justify their stance, and hope that the smaller guy/supplier will eventually write-off the balance and move on their merry way. I've seen it happen time and time again. This appears to be another example, but the court claim doesn't go into those specifics as to why SAI withheld payment. Either a jury will get to hear that argument, or the two sides will agree on a "discounted" resolution. In the latter, SAI will end up paying less (including their attorney fees) than if they had just honored the original agreement.

I don't like it and I wouldn't do business with people like that. But like I said, some feel it's part of the game, part of "doing business." Whatever. That mindset is not a good way to win friends and influence people (positively).

A previous poster indicated that entire warehouses of uncompleted cars sat waiting for their carbon fiber hoods, etc. According to the filing, the vendor provided all parts per the contract date, actually missing it by one week (which SAI agreed to by also agreeing to halve the employee incentive allowance that was also part of the contract). You don't deliver all 1,747 sets at the same time, so SAI was getting some product during the entire duration of the production run. Again, without the details we don't know what the delivery schedule looked like that created whatever "nuisance" for the receiver. It still doesn't add up for SAI to not honor the commitment though.

-Dean