Flexport is once again caught up in legal drama, this time with a warehousing and supply chain services provider.
In a California court, Unilogic is claiming that the digital freight forwarder breached two service agreements by failing to make more than $1 million in payments for performing warehousing and transloading services in 2023.
According to the lawsuit, filed April 19, Unilogic first entered into a warehousing services agreement with Flexport in February 2019, before amending it in April 2022. Under the deal, Unilogic provided certain warehouse, transloading, repackaging, reselection and distribution services to the defendant.
Related Stories
Unilogic alleges that Flexport failed to make all of the payments for warehousing services requested by the Shein partner during a period from August 2023 through January 2024.
Under the warehouse agreement, Unilogic alleges that Flexport owes the company a remaining balance of $121,516.53, plus additional interest, attorneys fees and costs.
“Despite demand, Flexport has failed and refused to make payment to Unilogic,” said the plaintiffs in their complaint. “As a result of Flexport’s nonpayment of amounts due and owing under the Warehouse Agreement, Flexport has defaulted under the Warehouse Agreement.”
The second breach of services involves payments for Unilogic’s transloading services, an agreement that was first entered into in January 2022. But the logistics company alleges that upon invoicing transloading services it provided to Flexport from November 2023 through December 2024, that it is still owed $991,516.53, plus additional interest, attorneys fees and costs.
The Illinois-based Unilogic has 1 million square feet of warehousing space, offering fulfillment and e-commerce services, as well as drayage, on-site storage, cross-docking and transloading solutions.
The logistics company demanded a jury trial as part of its five-page complaint.
Flexport denied all the allegations listed by Unilogic in its own defense filed June 3. The company fired back saying the warehousing provider’s claims “are barred by its failure to comply with multiple provisions of the operable agreement between the parties.”
As such, Flexport itself claimed that Unilogic was the party that was in breach of the contract for a multitude of reasons.
In the 11-page argument, the defendants wagged their finger at the plaintiff for “failing to procure insurance; failing to retain competent personnel; failing to retain personnel who were legally able to work in the United States; failing to conduct background checks on its personnel and those of its subcontractors; failing to comply with the security requirements; failing to provide services in accordance with applicable law; providing services in contravention of applicable laws; and failing to provide the services in a professional and workmanlike manner.”
Flexport has been in legal tussles left and right in recent months, with the new Convoy owner currently involved in two battles with a tire manufacturer, one clash with Peloton and most recently, another with Mexico-based freight forwarder Pak2Go Logistics.
In the case of Peloton, the lifestyle fitness brand filed a complaint to the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), accusing Flexport of failing to move its cargo in a timely manner over a three-year span. The company, known for its series of exercise bikes, said the move ultimately cost it “millions” in unreasonable, improper demurrage and detention (D&D) charges.
These late D&D charges are the subject of Flexport’s ongoing litigation with Giti Tire. In April, the San Francisco-based freight tech company sued tire manufacturer Giti Tire in a California court for not paying $12.3 million in detention fees accrued from 2021 to 2023. A month after Flexport filed its suit, Giti Tire fired back via a complaint to the FMC, asserting that both the invoices and charges violated the Shipping Act.
The fight with Pak2Go Logistics was filed by Flexport on May 20, over damaged cargo transported for one of its customers in September 2022.
The subject cargo included numerous cartons of electric milk extractor pumps, with the plaintiff alleging that the damages were a result of failed waterproofing. Flexport estimates that the damages amount to $131,970, with the bill of lading stating that 10 of the 23 pallets the cargo was carried on were wet.
The company demanded payment along with written notice of the cargo claim in June 2023, but Pak2Go has failed to respond, Flexport says.
Pak2Go has handled import and export shipments via air, ocean and surface for Flexport’s clientele since 2018.
