Tesla Pays $126,836 in First Lemon Law Settlement

Tesla's side of the story:

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/when-life-gives-you-lemons

"Another issue was that the car's fuse blew on numerous occasions. Each time, our engineers explored all possible explanations and were never able to find anything wrong with the car. Still, just to be sure, we replaced several parts that could have been related to the alleged problem – all at no expense to the customer. When the fuse kept blowing despite the new parts, and faced with no diagnosis showing anything wrong with the car, the engineers were moved to consider the possibility that the fuse had been tampered with. After investigating, they determined that the car's front trunk had been opened immediately before the fuse failure on each of these occasions. (The fuse is accessed through the front trunk.) Ultimately, Tesla service applied non-tamper tape to the fuse switch. From that point on, the fuse performed flawlessly."


It's clear that this guy was tampering with the car. He should never have received a penny.
 
Facts, schmacts.

B-b-b-b-b-but lemon law!!! Tesla!!!!
 
Elon Musk is like the Wu Tang Clan. Clearly nothing to fuck with. 1:00 mark.

Best line from the video. :)
 
pgaster said:
Tesla's side of the story:

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/when-life-gives-you-lemons

"Another issue was that the car's fuse blew on numerous occasions. Each time, our engineers explored all possible explanations and were never able to find anything wrong with the car. Still, just to be sure, we replaced several parts that could have been related to the alleged problem – all at no expense to the customer. When the fuse kept blowing despite the new parts, and faced with no diagnosis showing anything wrong with the car, the engineers were moved to consider the possibility that the fuse had been tampered with. After investigating, they determined that the car's front trunk had been opened immediately before the fuse failure on each of these occasions. (The fuse is accessed through the front trunk.) Ultimately, Tesla service applied non-tamper tape to the fuse switch. From that point on, the fuse performed flawlessly."


It's clear that this guy was tampering with the car. He should never have received a penny.
Click to expand...

If the car is 100% with the tamper tape on the fuse box then yeah, this is pretty messed up. The guy probably bought it for the looks and changed his mind when he actually had to plug it himself to keep it going instead of just driving up to a lazy mans full service gas station.
 
pgaster said:
Tesla's side of the story:

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/when-life-gives-you-lemons

"Another issue was that the car's fuse blew on numerous occasions. Each time, our engineers explored all possible explanations and were never able to find anything wrong with the car. Still, just to be sure, we replaced several parts that could have been related to the alleged problem – all at no expense to the customer. When the fuse kept blowing despite the new parts, and faced with no diagnosis showing anything wrong with the car, the engineers were moved to consider the possibility that the fuse had been tampered with. After investigating, they determined that the car's front trunk had been opened immediately before the fuse failure on each of these occasions. (The fuse is accessed through the front trunk.) Ultimately, Tesla service applied non-tamper tape to the fuse switch. From that point on, the fuse performed flawlessly."


It's clear that this guy was tampering with the car. He should never have received a penny.
Click to expand...

It's pretty clear Tesla's people are a biased source of information and it'd be somewhat blind to just take their word for it. The fact that they settled and gave someone money is really clear evidence that they didn't think they'd be able to actually defend themselves and avoid being beaten down in court regardless of whatever they're inventing to damage control their public image to their fandom and followers. So yeah, Tesla was wrong, they knew it and they gave the person they screwed money to keep quiet so they didn't have to end up in court where evidence of their shoddy workmanship would come to light.

Then again, the person who was clueless enough to buy their death trap, fire-hazard car in the first place should have seen in coming when people's homes were burning down when their cars el cheapo electric cars were catching on fire after being plugged in. UL listed? We don't need no stinking UL listing!
 
pgaster said:
Tesla's side of the story: Ultimately, Tesla service applied non-tamper tape to the fuse switch. From that point on, the fuse performed flawlessly."
Click to expand...


Proof of tampering and they still paid?


It was probably cheaper to just settle. :(
 
The guy is a scum bag, the entire video was him cherry picking comments on the internet to make his 'case,' but in the end there was no case. He was only there to file the paper work, there was literally no work done other wise.
 
Steve said:
It was probably cheaper to just settle. :(
Click to expand...

No doubt that was part of their decision to settle. Plus there's the matter of reputational risk. A car company in court over a supposedly defective vehicle is never good PR and can pretty much only hurt the company's image.
 
Something you might think about....

Demand is so hot for these cars that sometimes a used one is more valuable than a new one. Reason being, I get the used one immediately, where as I would need to wait for my order to get fulfilled on a new one.

IMHO, if this guy doesn't want to drive a Tesla, fine, Let Tesla take it back. I doubt Tesla will run into any problems finding a buyer for the car this guy apparently doesn't want, even if its used.
 
I think that guy who stole the Tesla roadster and then broke it in half by running it into a pole at 100+mph should hire that guy and sue Tesla as well. Obviously the car was defective...
 
Meh, no one is a jerk or a scrumbag, Tesla did what was right and settled. Their cars are not perfect and as we all know, electronics and wiring can be a pain in the ass to troubleshoot.
 
heatlesssun said:
No doubt that was part of their decision to settle. Plus there's the matter of reputational risk. A car company in court over a supposedly defective vehicle is never good PR and can pretty much only hurt the company's image.
Click to expand...
Yeah, because being vindicated in court for no wrong doing, on an already very public case that is even more public after paying out, is better than paying out for a lemon.

If they thought they could win in court and prove their vehicle wasn't defective, they would have. Losing in court because they knew their vehicle was defective though, and having all those facts part of public record would have been immensely embarrassing. And the idea that it would take months at a time in the shop for someone blowing fuses... that really strains credulity.

What is hilarious is the reality distortion field that Elon Musk is able to generate... Steve Jobs even at his prime has nothin on him!
 
felt said:
Meh, no one is a jerk or a scrumbag, Tesla did what was right and settled. Their cars are not perfect and as we all know, electronics and wiring can be a pain in the ass to troubleshoot.
Click to expand...
Tesla seems to have a reasonable defense. I see no similar weight on the other side, so you can't just hand wave it all away.

lol superstition.
 
Steve said:
Proof of tampering and they still paid?


It was probably cheaper to just settle. :(
Click to expand...

They did not show proof that the guy was tampering with the fuse. They indicated that he could have been tampering with it, that's all.
 
felt said:
Show proof of that.
Click to expand...

Oh, please. Go chase an ambulance.

-They discovered the trunk opened each time BEFORE the fuse "failure."
-It suddenly stop failing after they apply tamper proof tape
-The same lawyer filed a case for the same client the prior year on another car

That's enough for a civil case.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
.

Then again, the person who was clueless enough to buy their death trap, fire-hazard car in the first place should have seen in coming when people's homes were burning down when their cars el cheapo electric cars were catching on fire after being plugged in. UL listed? We don't need no stinking UL listing!
Click to expand...

Shoddy workmanship? The majority of this car is built by robots. As with any new product (see any electronic release) there are bound to be bugs that need to be ironed out (engineering oversights). As such, most Teslas have been corrected with revisions (new shielding, controller/charge software).

With regards to the Irvine garage fire, the fire department report said it started at the wall and it could not isolate a source besides that the fire started at the wall outlet/plug. This could be a faulty plug or it could be a faulty outlet that wasn't properly torqued all the way (220v dryer NEMA plugs are a cause of a lot of fires every year).

Otherwise, please cite your sources.
 
felt said:
Show proof of that.
Click to expand...
The public information provided earlier supports what I wrote. Being reasonable follows taking the available information and using it to form an opinion. There's enough information about the circumstances which points to wrong-doing by the guy who filed the lawsuit.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
It's pretty clear Tesla's people are a biased source of information and it'd be somewhat blind to just take their word for it. The fact that they settled and gave someone money is really clear evidence that they didn't think they'd be able to actually defend themselves and avoid being beaten down in court regardless of whatever they're inventing to damage control their public image to their fandom and followers. So yeah, Tesla was wrong, they knew it and they gave the person they screwed money to keep quiet so they didn't have to end up in court where evidence of their shoddy workmanship would come to light.

Then again, the person who was clueless enough to buy their death trap, fire-hazard car in the first place should have seen in coming when people's homes were burning down when their cars el cheapo electric cars were catching on fire after being plugged in. UL listed? We don't need no stinking UL listing!
Click to expand...

Wow, biased much? It's ironic that the person claiming he was attacked by fan boys would then use the words death trap and fire-hazard in the point they're trying to make. One could just as easily claim the same thing about gas engine cars and cite the GM ignition-gate scandal (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gmc+faulty+ignition).

Let's just break this down to facts:

The guy lived in Wisconsin, meaning the charging stations available are pretty minimal, mostly focused around Madison. Tesla themselves have a grand total of 4 super chargers. If you watch the video, the guy doesn't exactly live in a bustling suburb meaning he has to charge at home. This means his range is limited to about 100 miles (minimal battery pack has a 206 mile range according to Tesla's website) or he'd risk running out of juice before he could get home.

The nearest service depot was Chicago. That's not exactly a quick trip depending on where exactly you live in Wisconsin. It doesn't matter if it's a Tesla, Lamborghini, Porsche, BMW, etc. ALL cars are going to need serviced at some point. If the nearest fully qualified, capable facility is in another state, you may want to consider a different vehicle or accept the fact that you're going to have to put up with unusual circumstances for maintenance. This was something that was apparently not a fact the guy was willing to accept.

Tesla tried fighting it, but them settled for the asked for amount. They complied with the law (it was already on its way to court obviously) and settled. In return for the amount they paid, they have a vehicle that they can refurbish and guarantee to be resold (especially after the fanantic desire response, it's now a "special/unique" car) and they can glean all the logs/diagnostic data to find out whether he was tampering with it. That info could then be used to prevent it in future vehicles.

So we're left with a gentleman in Montgomery, WI who doesn't have a nearby super charger, doesn't have many options for EV chargers in general, has to have his car taken to Chicago for service (likely a fact that was discussed at time of purchase but without proof, not counting this), and documented evidence that a fuse which had blown multiple times stopped being an issue after tamper-proof tape was applied. Tesla did what any manufacturer would do, they agreed the more prudent course of action was to settle, take the car and move on, leaving him to do whatever he wants.

But then again, I'm using logic on the internet so what do I know?
 
okashira said:
Oh, please. Go chase an ambulance.

-They discovered the trunk opened each time BEFORE the fuse "failure."
-It suddenly stop failing after they apply tamper proof tape
-The same lawyer filed a case for the same client the prior year on another car

That's enough for a civil case.
Click to expand...
Opening a trunk is something I do everyday though when I go to work, since I put my gym clothes in the car. It would be weird to start the car and then step back out and open the trunk. It still doesn't explain why it took 66 days in the shop within the first year for Tesla to stick tamper tape on the fuse though, if that was the only issue (which supposedly it wasn't as he listed 12 complaints from faulty cooling pumps, steering wheel controls, etc).

Moreover, fuse problems aren't unusual with the Tesla, as many customers were blowing fuses left and right: http://www.edmunds.com/tesla/model-...a-model-s-high-power-wall-connector-flaw.html
Edmunds.com said:
Fuses were blowing inside early in-service HPWC units left and right. Tesla became concerned enough to release a firmware update that went out to all Model S cars in the field.

Among other things, the quietly-released update limited the car's maximum charging draw to 60 amps instead of 80 amps. Our car apparently got it, too, at some point, but we never ran across the warning screen that others saw because we had not yet plugged our car into a Tesla HPWC.
Click to expand...
In fact if you look at Dan Edmunds (editor of edmunds.com) long term review of his Tesla, he has had a myriad of complaints with his, with all kinds of weird things even his windows all lowering on their own without his input, his TPMS constantly saying it needed service, and their navigation system was replaced FOUR times among other issues: http://www.edmunds.com/tesla/model-s/2013/long-term-road-test/technology-audio.html
 
Oops, I did mean to agree though that the same client going after Volvo is very suspicious. Still, I think Tesla's settlement was to ensure that negative publicity was minimized from this, as the lawyer surely pointed out that he would bring to light all the problems that Tesla's are experiencing whether or not his client's case would hold water or not.
 
Go chase an ambulance, believe something just because the major corporation says it so, guess Tesla is immune from faulty hardware.

Brb, think I just heard an ambulance... :D
 
Ducman69 said:
Yeah, because being vindicated in court for no wrong doing, on an already very public case that is even more public after paying out, is better than paying out for a lemon.

If they thought they could win in court and prove their vehicle wasn't defective, they would have. Losing in court because they knew their vehicle was defective though, and having all those facts part of public record would have been immensely embarrassing. And the idea that it would take months at a time in the shop for someone blowing fuses... that really strains credulity.

What is hilarious is the reality distortion field that Elon Musk is able to generate... Steve Jobs even at his prime has nothin on him!
Click to expand...

Reality distortion field huh? This coming from a guy who selectively snips out all conflicting material while searching for his "supporting evidence" against the Tesla.

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1040958335&postcount=32
 
Great video. I love the catapult video shot, priceless.
Have to give the man some points for creativity.
 
Based on the circumstances, sucks that they were forced to give all that money.

At very most they should have been forced to give a new car and take the "broken" one back.
 
Eh, I'm sure Tesla figured it was better not to have some assclown driving their car around. That job is reserved for Audi drivers. ;) :D
 
Lol. It's the lemon law king. This is his thing. He's a media whore if the highest, bottom feeding order.

Note that the dissatisfied customer seems to be a repeat customer of The King.

Or should that be "accomplice?"

LOL. Maybe he could get Audi to fix my perpetually borked piston rings? Or crank case breather valve?
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
It's pretty clear Tesla's people are a biased source of information and it'd be somewhat blind to just take their word for it. The fact that they settled and gave someone money is really clear evidence that they didn't think they'd be able to actually defend themselves and avoid being beaten down in court regardless of whatever they're inventing to damage control their public image to their fandom and followers. So yeah, Tesla was wrong, they knew it and they gave the person they screwed money to keep quiet so they didn't have to end up in court where evidence of their shoddy workmanship would come to light.

Then again, the person who was clueless enough to buy their death trap, fire-hazard car in the first place should have seen in coming when people's homes were burning down when their cars el cheapo electric cars were catching on fire after being plugged in. UL listed? We don't need no stinking UL listing!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what that particular car cost, but they basically gave the guy his money back and paid his lawyer. That's about it. Whether the guy was responsible or the car was a lemon, it was clearly cheaper to settle than to fight.
 
Man that video is worse than the late night videos of the lawyers who can get you money for an accident that recently happened!
 
Dayaks said:
He keeps me coming back, he's an intelligent troll. He should move onto some good conspiracies like 9/11 being an inside job or not landing on the moon.
Click to expand...

I'm not very active in the forums but even I've noticed that all he does is spout about three bullshit posts every chance he gets ("Tesla death trap" being one of them). That's not intelligence.
 
Steve said:
Proof of tampering and they still paid?


It was probably cheaper to just settle. :(
Click to expand...

or if they settle they get to make claims on their blog that they do not have to prove. If they went to court they'd have to prove everything they said, instead they can just say it and have everyone believe them.

Imagine if they went to court and it was proven the vehicle was faulty, instead they get to say it wasn't them and it what the car owner and offer reasonable sounding excuses that everyone agrees with.
 
AaronGant said:
or if they settle they get to make claims on their blog that they do not have to prove. If they went to court they'd have to prove everything they said, instead they can just say it and have everyone believe them.

Imagine if they went to court and it was proven the vehicle was faulty, instead they get to say it wasn't them and it what the car owner and offer reasonable sounding excuses that everyone agrees with.
Click to expand...

high risk low reward vs low risk low cost. They made the right decision. Even if the car was fine, they could get a jury that wants to give the guy money. They might even opt to give him more money. Pay it off. Even the attorney said they were good guys (granted they had to be sued to do it). Taking the other side that htey don't think anything was wrong, and you end up with he said she said and let's face it, the guy who got the money is happy now.
 
pgaster said:
Tesla's side of the story:

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/when-life-gives-you-lemons

"Another issue was that the car's fuse blew on numerous occasions. Each time, our engineers explored all possible explanations and were never able to find anything wrong with the car. Still, just to be sure, we replaced several parts that could have been related to the alleged problem – all at no expense to the customer. When the fuse kept blowing despite the new parts, and faced with no diagnosis showing anything wrong with the car, the engineers were moved to consider the possibility that the fuse had been tampered with. After investigating, they determined that the car's front trunk had been opened immediately before the fuse failure on each of these occasions. (The fuse is accessed through the front trunk.) Ultimately, Tesla service applied non-tamper tape to the fuse switch. From that point on, the fuse performed flawlessly."


It's clear that this guy was tampering with the car. He should never have received a penny.
Click to expand...
To go through the trouble to make a YouTube that's more comedy then info, I began to think some tampering was involved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top