Silent Majority...

[Watashiwah]

Maybe Terrimom inferred she’d would have a ‘spot in line’ since one would always be in line if the roofer didn’t just immediately climb up on her roof and start swinging a hammer. She wasn’t given an option to get a ‘guaranteed spot in line’ for a non refundable premium. The ‘non refundable premium’ for a product or service in a Contract would mean that both parties would have to give up something to form a valid contract. Terrimom gave up money and the roofer was to give up labor (services).

Paul would love all his flock to think that a ‘spot in line’ for what at ‘some point in time’ became for a non product. You simply cannot have a ‘spot in line’ for nothing: it remains to be seen if investors’ (both stock and reservationists) money was toward product development or otherwise poorly spent. I maintain that the actual ‘spot in line’ contract may be null and void. There is insufficient consideration from Elio’s side of the bargain.

Edit: Did the guy that did try to sue Elio do it in Small Claims? Small Claims won't be where this ends up; at least two things will come up (which likely has Paul a little concerned). When did the complainant(s) sign the contract, and where was all that money spent, and when?

 

[Samalross]

Maybe Terrimom inferred she’d would have a ‘spot in line’ since one would always be in line if the roofer didn’t just immediately climb up on her roof and start swinging a hammer. She wasn’t given an option to get a ‘guaranteed spot in line’ for a non refundable premium. The ‘non refundable premium’ for a product or service in a Contract would mean that both parties would have to give up something to form a valid contract. Terrimom gave up money and the roofer was to give up labor (services).

Paul would love all his flock to think that a ‘spot in line’ for what at ‘some point in time’ became for a non product. You simply cannot have a ‘spot in line’ for nothing: it remains to be seen if investors’ (both stock and reservationists) money was toward product development or otherwise poorly spent. I maintain that the actual ‘spot in line’ contract may be null and void. There is insufficient consideration from Elio’s side of the bargain.

Edit: Did the guy that did try to sue Elio do it in Small Claims? Small Claims won't be where this ends up; at least two things will come up (which likely has Paul a little concerned). When did the complainant(s) sign the contract, and where was all that money spent, and when?

The people that made the commitment to buy have a valid contract. I think that Elio will be hard pressed to say that it wasn't. There needs to be three things for a contract. A price both agreed upon price ($7000), timeline (scheduled in 2017 or 2018). Financial consideration ( buyer $1000 Elio reduced price ). They fulfilled all terms. The spot in line is just another way of saying deposit and courts would treat it as such. The timeline will be argued that it was not an exact day. The courts would consider it a rough timeline. When you order a Tesla 3 you are not given an exact date, but it is still a contract to purchase, and Tesla treats it that way. If Elio Motors collapses, there will be different types of actions from the SIL people. I feel that the commitment to buy people are the only reason it has not shut down. I think that they were planning to keep the money raised, as creditors from the loans. I think that the lawyers will go through the loans and try to get them declared as stripped assets. Will be an interesting couple of months.

 

[Watashiwah]

The people that made the commitment to buy have a valid contract. I think that Elio will be hard pressed to say that it wasn't. There needs to be three things for a contract. A price both agreed upon price ($7000), timeline (scheduled in 2017 or 2018). Financial consideration ( buyer $1000 Elio reduced price ). They fulfilled all terms. The spot in line is just another way of saying deposit and courts would treat it as such. The timeline will be argued that it was not an exact day. The courts would consider it a rough timeline. When you order a Tesla 3 you are not given an exact date, but it is still a contract to purchase, and Tesla treats it that way. If Elio Motors collapses, there will be different types of actions from the SIL people. I feel that the commitment to buy people are the only reason it has not shut down. I think that they were planning to keep the money raised, as creditors from the loans. I think that the lawyers will go through the loans and try to get them declared as stripped assets. Will be an interesting couple of months.

Samalross, are you saying that you think Elio Motors will be in breach if they don't produce a product? If you are right about the "SIL" being viewed as a deposit, then if EM is looking at breaching, they'd probably like the contracts to be declared void, since they have no assets to sell or money in the bank to payback the depositors anyhow. This is a pretty likely scenario, it seems.

 

[Samalross]

Samalross, are you saying that you think Elio Motors will be in breach if they don't produce a product? If you are right about the "SIL" being viewed as a deposit, then if EM is looking at breaching, they'd probably like the contracts to be declared void, since they have no assets to sell or money in the bank to payback the depositors anyhow. This is a pretty likely scenario, it seems.

I don't think that they can just void the $7000 committed contract people. It would be breach of contract and I think that they would have a good case to get money from ESG , the loan payments, and officers of the company.

 

[4matic]

Samalross, are you saying that you think Elio Motors will be in breach if they don't produce a product? If you are right about the "SIL" being viewed as a deposit, then if EM is looking at breaching, they'd probably like the contracts to be declared void, since they have no assets to sell or money in the bank to payback the depositors anyhow. This is a pretty likely scenario, it seems.

I wonder what liability the Board of Directors has if it’s determined that Elio deposit holder’s money was spent in frivolous & fiscally onerous manner...

I also think that Stu made a large mistake (as a board member) by aligning his financial interest’s too closely to Paul’s...since Stu has deep pockets...he might have substantial liability should Elio Motors faces any class action litigation...

 

[Samalross]

I wonder what liability the Board of Directors has if it’s determined that Elio deposit holder’s money was spent in frivolous & fiscally onerous manner...

I also think that Stu made a large mistake (as a board member) by aligning his financial interest’s too closely to Paul’s...since Stu has deep pockets...he might have substantial liability should Elio Motors faces any class action litigation...

You are right. This could be interesting, I am sure that there are a lot of lawyers hoping for a class action. Stu's loan interest rates would not look good in court.

 

[Elio Amazed]

I would imagine their pockets were locked down and they had their butts covered long ago.
I know that posting a ton of disclaimer signs at amusement parks & other public places...
That say "Not responsible" and "Ride at your own risk" don't mean squat in the end...
But there - is - no - way that these guys didn't cover themselves with kevlar LLC.
And as far as recovering anything, there's nothing corporate to recover!

It's long gone! So no self-respecting ambulance chaser...
...(see what I did there?)... is going to waste time going after a dry well.

 

[4matic]

I would imagine their pockets were locked down and they had their butts covered long ago.
I know that posting a ton of disclaimer signs at amusement parks & other public places...
That say "Not responsible" and "Ride at your own risk" don't mean squat in the end...
But there - is - no - way that these guys didn't cover themselves with kevlar LLC.
And as far as recovering anything, there's nothing corporate to recover!

It's long gone! So no self-respecting ambulance chaser...
...(see what I did there?)... is going to waste time going after a dry well.

Yes...you’re absolutely correct!

Lawsuits are expensive... and class action litigation takes years to settle... I assume there’s nothing financially to recover from Elio even if the reservation holders would prevail...

One final point...Kevlar LLC’s are not exempt from prosecution should fiscal misdeed’s be uncovered...

Paul’s absence during the last seven months...seems to indicate a messy internal struggle within Elio Motors...

 

[Samalross]

The threat of a costly lawsuit could encourage plaintiffs to open up their wallets. My sister had a client go after the clients husband to contest a will. The legal bills were bigger than the estate. Client was happy that her husband never received anything. Sometimes it is best to settle even if you are covered in kevlar.

 

[Elio Amazed]

One final point...Kevlar LLC’s are not exempt from prosecution should fiscal misdeed’s be uncovered...

People have been talking about litigation in this thread and not prosecution.
But, OK... Different things. One can pave the way for the other... Ask OJ.
I think part of the Kevlar is that care was taken to stay on the fine line.

I also believe that Paul would be the primary in a civil suit.
And his ~million or two won't go very far in class action.

The big chunks of debt and huge legal fees come first.

Again, I'm confident that Stu's well insulated.
And I actually think he may be able to play victim.