Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Tesla

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Well, it's not like we didn't see this coming a mile away. :(

(1) Tesla's statements about the Model S's highest safety rating and its lack of prior fire incidents were materially misleading, due to undisclosed puncture and fire risks in its undercarriage and lithium ion battery pack; (2) the Model S suffered from material defects which caused the battery pack to ignite and erupt in flames under certain driving conditions; (3) Tesla's future sales, its next generation Model X introduction, and its stock price were extremely vulnerable to the inherent risk posed by the Model S's undercarriage and battery pack design flaws; (4) Tesla was unable to maintain a level of automobile deliveries sufficient to satisfy analyst concerns and compensate for other declining revenue streams; and, (5) as a result of the foregoing, Tesla's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
Click to expand...
 
Seems like everyone who had a fire, was really thrilled with how Tesla handled it and were all pretty happy about things. If the same conditions that caused batteries to be punctured from below, happened to the fuel tank of a vehicle I imagine the chance for fire would be equal to or higher than what happened to the Tesla?
 
Just another ploy to lower its stock value so investors can cash out when it rebounds.
 
SilverSliver said:
Seems like everyone who had a fire, was really thrilled with how Tesla handled it and were all pretty happy about things. If the same conditions that caused batteries to be punctured from below, happened to the fuel tank of a vehicle I imagine the chance for fire would be equal to or higher than what happened to the Tesla?
Click to expand...

How many instances of vehicles fires do you even hear about due to something puncturing it from below? Trust me when I say that if enough petrol or diesel powered vehicles were going up in flames in a similar fashion, the world and lawyers would be all over it.

That said, this is new technology and people should understand that there is always going to be a learning curve in designing new stuff. The fortunate thing is that everyone got advance notice when suffering damage.
 
amdgamer said:
How many instances of vehicles fires do you even hear about due to something puncturing it from below? Trust me when I say that if enough petrol or diesel powered vehicles were going up in flames in a similar fashion, the world and lawyers would be all over it.

That said, this is new technology and people should understand that there is always going to be a learning curve in designing new stuff. The fortunate thing is that everyone got advance notice when suffering damage.
Click to expand...

I hear about vehicle fires all the time? Someone was killed on one this weekend here, actually.
 
amdgamer said:
How many instances of vehicles fires do you even hear about due to something puncturing it from below? Trust me when I say that if enough petrol or diesel powered vehicles were going up in flames in a similar fashion, the world and lawyers would be all over it.

That said, this is new technology and people should understand that there is always going to be a learning curve in designing new stuff. The fortunate thing is that everyone got advance notice when suffering damage.
Click to expand...

I don't hear about vehicle fires ever. But I personally have seen enough burned-out frames and smoldering cars on the side of the road to know that it's simply common enough that they're not worth mentioning.
 
this is supported by oil companies. they must slow down the growth of electric cars
 
This is nothing more than a ploy. There are way more fires on standard gasoline powered vehicles.

The perfect analogy for this is a plane crash. The numbers show us that you are MUCH safer flying... But, when a plane crashes, it's a HUGE media frenzy.
 
It's just the way business works in the country, full of legal leeches that latch on to anything they can blackmail a company with, I wonder how big of a drain it is on the economy, probably billions.
 
I'll rip you Tesla
There's just no putting it gently
I don't alternate my flows
I diss you, directly

/obscure?
 
amdgamer said:
Really? Because I see this as nothing more than lawyers salivating and getting greedy.
Click to expand...

Yup, that's what it looks like to me as well.

Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP has filed a class action lawsuit against Tesla Motor, Inc. ("Tesla" or the "Company") and certain of its officers...on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Tesla securities between May 10, 2013 and November 6, 2013 both dates inclusive.
Click to expand...

If you are a shareholder who purchased Tesla securities during the Class Period, you have until January 7, 2014 to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class.
Click to expand...

I don't know how class action lawsuits normally go, but I find it interesting that they announce the lawsuit, THEN try to find a lead plaintiff for the case.

aardvark sandwich said:
wasn't this like two cars?
Click to expand...

In the press release, they list three car fire incidents. I guess that's enough to start calling it a defect for class action lawsuit purposes?
 
SilverSliver said:
Seems like everyone who had a fire, was really thrilled with how Tesla handled it and were all pretty happy about things. If the same conditions that caused batteries to be punctured from below, happened to the fuel tank of a vehicle I imagine the chance for fire would be equal to or higher than what happened to the Tesla?
Click to expand...

Not really. Gas needs something to light it on fire. if you just start leaking gas by itself it won't burst into flames. Just because you see it in movies or on tv doesn't make it real.

also your gas tank doesn't normally burst open if you run over something small. I actually ran over a deer. the bottom of my car didn't look pretty but it never exploded.

Neb said:
Yup, that's what it looks like to me as well.





I don't know how class action lawsuits normally go, but I find it interesting that they announce the lawsuit, THEN try to find a lead plaintiff for the case.



In the press release, they list three car fire incidents. I guess that's enough to start calling it a defect for class action lawsuit purposes?
Click to expand...

That is a somewhat odd way to go, normally they would get at least 1 person before they start. But I guess they just want to make sure to be the one that gets the money. As for as 3 being enough. For the small number of them out there, I can see it being enough for them to work at getting the issue fixed. Class action status already is a little much, however 7 kids dying from cribs was enough for them to ban them from being sold and used due to being too dangerous. So who knows.
 
NEODARK said:
This is nothing more than a ploy. There are way more fires on standard gasoline powered vehicles.
Click to expand...
I do not stand on either side of this issue, but the comparison is not as simple as that. It is important to look into the cause of the fire. A car catching fire after a big impact in an accident is completely different from a car catching fire after scrapping it's bottom on a speed bump. The later case would be more alarming in this example because it's obvious there's nothing you can do when a car gets wrecked, but if a slight bump can set a car on fire, then this is a different problem.

Not saying that this is the problem with Tesla car of course. Just an example to point out the difference.
 
Hornet said:
Not saying that this is the problem with Tesla car of course. Just an example to point out the difference.
Click to expand...

How can you even make that comparison if that isn't the actual problem? And vehicle fires happen for many reasons, and occur quite often in gas powered vehicles. I have had the odd occassion to see a number of cars on fire on the road. I have also had a car catch on fire myself. You don't even need an accident to cause it. The difference is the severity.

Also note here the class action suit is not about the fires itself. It clearly states it is about the misleading statements and information about the safety of the vehicle. Which means they either already have proof, or will have to show some kind of proof that Tesla did infact know about the faulty materials and potential safety hazards.

All that being said, there have only been a few cases percentage wise, but if the materials are indeed faulty, there could be even more coming over time. I am on the fence over the issue, if they were purposefully misleading people, that is troubling, but to be honest many companies mislead their customers over issues that are deemed too statistically low.
 
rkand said:
I don't hear about vehicle fires ever. But I personally have seen enough burned-out frames and smoldering cars on the side of the road to know that it's simply common enough that they're not worth mentioning.
Click to expand...


Tell that to Paul Walker
 
"Material defects under certain driving conditions"-Otherwise known as "F#@*ing trailer hitch bouncing up and lancing the battery pack".
 
Note the class action is not for owners of the cars, but owners of securities.
 
Kingofl337 said:
Tell that to Paul Walker
Click to expand...

Don't think there has been a report of a Tesla exceeding 100mph into a streetlight, and then catching fire, and too soon dude, bad enough they are flogging FatF 6 with a metal case because he died, not to mention part of the money spent on purchasing it, will go to his charity instead of all of the money.
 
Outamyhead said:
Don't think there has been a report of a Tesla exceeding 100mph into a streetlight, and then catching fire, and too soon dude, bad enough they are flogging FatF 6 with a metal case because he died, not to mention part of the money spent on purchasing it, will go to his charity instead of all of the money.
Click to expand...

Not to mention Paul was not driving, it was a friend. He had been allowing his friends to test drive his fancy car.
 
Shoot a gas tank. Result most times will not be an explosion.
Shoot a Telsa battery pack,,,,,

Hey, How about a video of a .50 BMG round through the battery pack?
 
That's the thing about class action suits that I think are fucking retarded. As mentioned 3 incidents of fire, but the lawyers will use every single person who bought the car as part of their class action lawsuit because this could possibly happen with them. Not just 3 people vs Tesla, which while granted isn't huge numbers it is in the thousands I believe.

Have recall, attach extra thick steel plate under battery compartment, lose a couple miles in range. Toyota did it with people who somehow got their floor mats stuck under their pedal or some shit, so what did Toyota do? Recall to fix, cut the corners off the bottom of the pedal, problem solved.

It's sad to see this happen since Tesla really is at the forefront of electric car technology.
 
NoOther said:
How can you even make that comparison if that isn't the actual problem? And vehicle fires happen for many reasons, and occur quite often in gas powered vehicles. I have had the odd occassion to see a number of cars on fire on the road. I have also had a car catch on fire myself. You don't even need an accident to cause it. The difference is the severity.

Also note here the class action suit is not about the fires itself. It clearly states it is about the misleading statements and information about the safety of the vehicle. Which means they either already have proof, or will have to show some kind of proof that Tesla did infact know about the faulty materials and potential safety hazards.

All that being said, there have only been a few cases percentage wise, but if the materials are indeed faulty, there could be even more coming over time. I am on the fence over the issue, if they were purposefully misleading people, that is troubling, but to be honest many companies mislead their customers over issues that are deemed too statistically low.
Click to expand...

sfsuphysics said:
That's the thing about class action suits that I think are fucking retarded. As mentioned 3 incidents of fire, but the lawyers will use every single person who bought the car as part of their class action lawsuit because this could possibly happen with them. Not just 3 people vs Tesla, which while granted isn't huge numbers it is in the thousands I believe.

Have recall, attach extra thick steel plate under battery compartment, lose a couple miles in range. Toyota did it with people who somehow got their floor mats stuck under their pedal or some shit, so what did Toyota do? Recall to fix, cut the corners off the bottom of the pedal, problem solved.

It's sad to see this happen since Tesla really is at the forefront of electric car technology.
Click to expand...


Reading comprehension fail!

Read the story again, the lawsuit isn't for owners of the car but is seeking to sue them on behalf of their shareholders.
 
As I recall, given a fire the care performed as required/expected by keeping all fire out of the passenger compartment.
 
Exavior said:
Not really. Gas needs something to light it on fire. if you just start leaking gas by itself it won't burst into flames. Just because you see it in movies or on tv doesn't make it real.
Click to expand...

I know it's not like the movies, but I've seen plenty of wrecks that have resulted into vehicle fires.
 
amdgamer said:
How many instances of vehicles fires do you even hear about due to something puncturing it from below? Trust me when I say that if enough petrol or diesel powered vehicles were going up in flames in a similar fashion, the world and lawyers would be all over it.

That said, this is new technology and people should understand that there is always going to be a learning curve in designing new stuff. The fortunate thing is that everyone got advance notice when suffering damage.
Click to expand...

That's because vehicles with a hole in the gas tank or fuel delivery system generally just run out of gas rather than catching on fire. Car fires do happen, but they are pretty rare.

The battery catching fire on a Tesla car is pretty rare too, and the firewall did it's job. So while there was considerable property damage, there wasn't serious physical injury. It sounds really bad, and a car catching on fire is scary, but in terms of risks to the passengers it is probably less dangerous than many failures cars have suffered from.
 
DarkStar_WNY said:
Reading comprehension fail!

Read the story again, the lawsuit isn't for owners of the car but is seeking to sue them on behalf of their shareholders.
Click to expand...

I didn't fail, I read what it said and commented on it. The basis of the suit is on based on misleading information as I stated. I never commented on who is suing, just based on the facts revolving around it.
 
DarkStar_WNY said:
Read the story again, the lawsuit isn't for owners of the car but is seeking to sue them on behalf of their shareholders.
Click to expand...

Seems odd, technically shareholders are the owners of the company, so by suing the company aren't they basically suing themselves?

Sell the fucking stock when you first heard about the fires and be done with it, and understand that occasionally companies fuck up and cause the share price to plummet. No one else sues because their shares in company X are now worthless.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Seems odd, technically shareholders are the owners of the company, so by suing the company aren't they basically suing themselves?

Sell the fucking stock when you first heard about the fires and be done with it, and understand that occasionally companies fuck up and cause the share price to plummet. No one else sues because their shares in company X are now worthless.
Click to expand...

You mean like no one sued Facebook over the IPO...more than once..oops. Yeah that happened. This is actually far more common than you realize. And they have a right. Since public companies are supposed to be disclosing such information to their shareholders. Since the shareholders are the owners as you put it, they are supposed to be informed of issues that may affect the value of the company. And they certainly aren't supposed to be lied to.
 
This law firm seems to have a case against just about every company out there. They appear to be the very definition of ambulance chasers.

Securities Litigation

Yum Brands, Inc.
A-Power Energy Generation Systems
A123 Systems
AboveNet
Accentia Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.
Achillion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Adams Golf
Advance America, Cash Advance Centers
Advanced Battery Technologies
Affymax, Inc.
AgFeed Industries
Amarin Corporation
Archipelago Learning
ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Ariba
Aruba Networks, Inc.
Atossa Genetics, Inc.
ATP Oil and Gas Corporation
ATS Corporation
Aveo Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Avid Technology
Biolase, Inc.
BioMimetic Therapeutics
BioScrip, Inc.
BlackBerry Ltd.
Blackboard Inc.
Blue Coat Systems
BP plc
CenturyLink, Inc.
CH Energy Group
Chelsea Therapeutics
Chesapeake Energy Corp.
China Automotive Systems, Inc.
China Medical Technologies
China North East Petroleum Ltd.
China Sky One Medical
China TransInfo Technology Corp.
ChinaCast Education
Collective Brands, Inc.
Columbia Laboratories
Computer Sciences Corp.
Constellation Energy
Convio
Corinthian Colleges, Inc.
Credo Petroleum
DDi Corp.
Delcath Systems, Inc.
Delphi Financial Group
DemandTec
Digital Generation, Inc.
Dreams, Inc.
Duoyuan Printing Inc.
Ecotality, Inc.
Ener 1, Inc.
eToys, Inc.
Exide Technologies
Expedia, Inc.
Facebook
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
First Marblehead Corporation
First Solar
Furniture Brands International, Inc.
Gen-Probe Incorporated
General Bearing
General Cable Corporation
Gerova Financial Group
Golfsmith International Holdings
Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Corporation
Great Wolf Resorts
Green Dot Corporation
Groupon
Harvest Natural Resources
Hecla Mining Company
Hemispherx Biopharma, Inc.
Hewlett-Packard Company
Houston American Energy
Hughes Telematics
Human Genome Sciences
IEC Electronics Corporation
iGATE Corporation
Illumina
Imperial Sugar Company
Incyte Corporation
Inhibitex
IntegraMed America
Interline Brands
Intutitive Surgical, Inc.
J.C. Penney Company, Inc.
JAKKS Pacific, Inc.
Juniper Networks, Inc.
K-Sea Transportation
K12
Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.
Kior, Inc.
KIT Digital
L&L Energy, Inc.
LeCroy Corporation
LIBOR
Holding Company
Lime Energy Co.
Linn Co, LLC
Linn Energy, LLC
Livent Noteholders Litigation
Longwei Petroleum Investment Holding Ltd.
magicJack VocalTec Ltd.
Magnum Hunter Resources Corporation
MannKind Corporation
Marshall & Ilsley
Maxwell Technologies, Inc.
McDermott International, Inc.
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.
Mecox Lane Limited
Medtox Scientific
Medtronic, Inc.
Mela Sciences Inc.
Mellanox Technologies, Ltd.
MF Global Holdings
Micromet
Micronetics
Microsoft Corporation
Miller Energy Resources, Inc.
MiMedx Group, Inc.
Molycorp, Inc.
Motricity
Nam Tai Electronics, Inc.
Netflix
Network Equipment Technologies
New Oriental Education & Technology Group Inc.
NQ Mobile, Inc.
NuVasive, Inc.
OCZ Technology Group, Inc.
OvaScience, Inc.
Overseas Shipholding Group, Inc.
O’Charley’s
Pain Therapeutics
Penson Worldwide, Inc.
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals
Perrigo Company
PetroChina Company Ltd
PF Chang's China Bistro, Inc.
Polycom, Inc.
Poseidon Concepts Corp.
Pretium Resources, Inc.
Primedia
Putnam Mutual Funds
Qiao Xing Mobile Communication Ltd.
Qiao Xing Universal Resources
Quest Software
Questcor
RadioShack
Sequans Communications
SeraCare Life Sciences
Silvercorp Metals, Inc.
SinoHub, Inc.
SinoTech Energy Ltd
Solutia
Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc.
Star Scientific
Subaye, Inc.
Suntech Power Holdings
SureWest Communications
Swisher Hygiene
Symbol Technologies, Inc.
Taleo
Tangoe, Inc.
Tellabs, Inc.
Tesla Motors, Inc.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
The Pep Boys – Manny, Moe & Jack
The Phoenix Companies
Thomas & Betts
Tibet Pharmaceuticals
Tower Group International Ltd
TranS1
Transcend Services
Ubiquiti Networks, Inc.
Uni-Pixel, Inc.
Unilife Corporation
Velti Plc
Ventrus Biosciences, Inc.
Veolia Environnement S.A.
VeriFone Systems
Vical Incorporated
ViroPharma
Vivendi Universal, S.A.
Vocera Communications, Inc.
Walter Investment Management Corporation
WCA Waste Corporation
Winn-Dixie Stores
X-Rite
Zagg Incorporated
ZOLL Medical
Zynga

Insurance Litigation

Aetna (Amer. Medical Assoc.)
Aetna (Association of New Jersey Chiropractors)
Blue Cross Blue Shield
CIGNA (American Medical Association)
Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co.
Fidelity National Title Ins. Co.
First American Title Ins. Co
UnitedHealth Group
UnitedHealth Group (Premier)
UnitedHealth Insurance Co.
Wellpoint (Amer. Dental Assoc.)
Wellpoint (Amer. Medical Assoc.)

Antitrust Litigation

After Market Filters
Air Cargo
Chocolate
Compressors
Flonase
Korean Airlines
Municipal Derivatives
New Motor Vehicles Canadian Export Antitrust
Reformulated Gasoline
Visa/Mastercard Interchange Fee
Wellbutrin SR

Microsoft Corporation
 
NEODARK said:
This is nothing more than a ploy. There are way more fires on standard gasoline powered vehicles.

The perfect analogy for this is a plane crash. The numbers show us that you are MUCH safer flying... But, when a plane crashes, it's a HUGE media frenzy.
Click to expand...
There are way more gasoline powered vehicles. How many of the $80,000 ones catch on fire when running over debris within the first six months.

It the triviality of the damage which is the cause for concern. Just by percentage of underbody area, the fuel system of a gas vehicle is less likely to get touched. Not to mention there are substantial other under body features that would connect with the debris before the fuel system such as cross-members or suspension, axles, etc. That would either win vs. the debris or the car would stop.

Making the battery the lowest point in the car extending over about 75% of the underbody is turning out to be a bad choice.

The real incident is going to be a car on car pretzel accident where that flammable battery goo gets spread all over another car and the other car's occupants don't get away unscathed.
 
Ford Pinto.

It was an under designed gas tank. The company did not pay much in restitution. What was payed out was hush money and grease.
 
The problem is the battery themselves, not Tesla.

How often do we see lithium ion batteries catch on fire from time to time in the news?

We've read it happen from smartphones up to laptops to the one on the new Dreamliner from Boeing. Lithium ion is highly volatile and easily overheats without proper and adequate cooling. And, in many cases it seems, that any puncture or sudden movement causes them to catch on fire or explode.

You can wrap that battery pack In steel, Kevlar, or titanium alloy, it's still a very volatile and dangerous battery operating at very high voltages.

This is one of the more serious issues with electric vehicles from any company, and this power source needs to be addressed and replaced with something better. Until we can get better battery technology with longer range, and can operate as safely as lead acid-- and I'm saying that lightly-- electric vehicles will not be as widespread as normal cars with internal combustion engines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top