XML 47 R26.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.21.1

Commitments And Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Feb. 28, 2021
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments And Contingencies | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (A)Litigation CarMax entities were defendants in four proceedings asserting wage and hour claims with respect to CarMax sales consultants and non-exempt employees in California. The asserted claims include failure to pay minimum wage; provide meal periods and rest breaks; pay statutory/contractual wages; reimburse for work-related expenses and provide accurate itemized wage statements; unfair competition; and Private Attorney General Act claims. On September 4, 2015, Craig Weiss et al., v. CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC, and CarMax Auto Superstores West Coast, Inc., a putative class action, was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Placer. The Weiss lawsuit seeks civil penalties, fines, cost of suit, and the recovery of attorneys’ fees. On June 29, 2016, Ryan Gomez et al. v. CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC, and CarMax Auto Superstores West Coast, Inc., a putative class action, was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, Los Angeles. The Gomez lawsuit seeks declaratory relief, unspecified damages, restitution, statutory penalties, interest, cost and attorneys’ fees. On October 31, 2017, Joshua Sabanovich v. CarMax Superstores California, LLC et al., a putative class action, was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Stanislaus. The Sabanovich lawsuit seeks unspecified damages, restitution, statutory penalties, interest, cost and attorneys’ fees. On November 21, 2018, Derek McElhannon et al. v. CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC and CarMax Auto Superstores West Coast, Inc., a putative class action, was filed in Superior Court of California, County of Alameda. On February 1, 2019, the McElhannon lawsuit was removed to the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, San Francisco Division. The lawsuit was remanded back to the Superior Court of California, County of Alameda on June 4, 2019. The McElhannon lawsuit seeks unspecified damages, restitution, statutory and/or civil penalties, interest, cost and attorneys’ fees. In fiscal 2021, CarMax reached a global agreement settling the Weiss, Gomez and McElhannon lawsuits on a class basis. The settlement agreement was approved by the Superior Court of California, County of Placer on December 10, 2020. The monetary settlement under this agreement was for an immaterial amount. The Sabanovich lawsuit was not included in the global settlement agreement. Based upon our evaluation of information currently available, we believe that the ultimate resolution of the Sabanovich lawsuit will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. As previously reported, the company cooperated with representatives from multiple California municipality district attorney offices in an inquiry by those offices into the handling, storage and disposal of certain types of hazardous waste at our store locations in those municipalities. CarMax and the district attorney offices reached a settlement agreement, which was entered and approved by the Superior Court of California, County of Orange on June 8, 2020. The settlement included an immaterial monetary payment covering penalties, costs, and supplemental environmental projects as well as certain injunctive relief. The company is a class member in a consolidated and settled class action lawsuit (In re: Takata Airbag Product Liability Litigation (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida)) against Toyota, Mazda, Subaru, BMW, Honda, Nissan and Ford related to the economic loss associated with defective Takata airbags installed as original equipment in certain model vehicles from model years 2000-2018. On April 15, 2020, CarMax received $40.3 million in net recoveries from the Toyota, Mazda, Subaru, BMW, Honda and Nissan settlement funds. CarMax remains a class member for the Ford settlement fund. We are unable to make a reasonable estimate of the amount or range of gain that could result from CarMax’s participation in the Ford settlement fund. We are involved in various other legal proceedings in the normal course of business. Based upon our evaluation of information currently available, we believe that the ultimate resolution of any such proceedings will not have a material adverse effect, either individually or in the aggregate, on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. (B)Other Matters In accordance with the terms of real estate lease agreements, we generally agree to indemnify the lessor from certain liabilities arising as a result of the use of the leased premises, including environmental liabilities and repairs to leased property upon termination of the lease. Additionally, in accordance with the terms of agreements entered into for the sale of properties, we generally agree to indemnify the buyer from certain liabilities and costs arising subsequent to the date of the sale, including environmental liabilities and liabilities resulting from the breach of representations or warranties made in accordance with the agreements. We do not have any known material environmental commitments, contingencies or other indemnification issues arising from these arrangements. As part of our customer service strategy, we guarantee the used vehicles we sell at retail with a 90-day/4,000-mile limited warranty. A vehicle in need of repair within this period will be repaired free of charge. As a result, each vehicle sold has an implied liability associated with it. Accordingly, based on historical trends, we record a provision for estimated future repairs during the guarantee period for each vehicle sold. The liability for this guarantee was $15.2 million as of February 28, 2021 and $10.5 million as of February 29, 2020, and is included in accrued expenses and other current liabilities. At various times we may have certain purchase obligations that are enforceable and legally binding primarily related to real estate purchases, advertising and third-party outsourcing services. As of February 28, 2021, we have material purchase obligations of $141.2 million, of which $68.0 million are expected to be fulfilled in fiscal 2022.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=121559207&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=121559207&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration