News

Tesla Settles Suit Over Model S Battery Voltage Reduction

Tesla has agreed to pay $1.5 million to settle a lawsuit claiming a software update reduced maximum battery voltage in 1,743 Model S sedans.

The settlement will amount to pay out $625 to each owner affected. 

Tesla has also attempted to fix the issue for owners. A Reuters report said the voltage limitation was temporary, with a 10% reduction lasting about 3 months, and a smaller 7% reduction lasting another 7 months before the corrective update was released in March 2020.

The report quoted settlement documents where Tesla data shows 1,552 vehicles had maximum battery voltage fully restored and 57 have had battery replacements and for other vehicles, the maximum voltage should continue to be restored over time, the settlement documents said.

The suite was originally filed in 2019. Of the $1.5 million settlement, $410,000 will be used to pay attorney fees.

glide

Active Member
Jun 6, 2018
3,662
3,827
USA
“Tesla has also attempted to fix the issue for owners”

Bull. Shitt.

I wound up selling my car because Tesla refused to do anything to fix it and it became absolutely useless except for driving around town.

Hopefully former owners will be compensate. I have 6+ Service tickets in my vehicle history for the issue.
 

tpoltron

Member
May 12, 2013
385
490
Cupertino, CA
Much slower road tripping was the biggest reason we recently sold our 2014 S. I expect that Tesla will somehow weasel out of paying a bunch of us (only for current owners or some such) just like they did for 3rd party emmc repairs that they clearly said they would cover.
 

glide

Active Member
Jun 6, 2018
3,662
3,827
USA
Love all the fanbois in this thread.

“it’s no big deal. Only impacted a few thousand $130K cars.”

or

“it’s no big deal. They are going to pay you $600 after 3 years of telling you to **** off and there’s nothing wrong with your car.”

This is a case of Tesla WILLFULLY crippling vehicles and LYING to customers (especially early adopters) about it. IMO they should be paying A LOT more to impacted owners.
 

WhiteWi

Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Feb 21, 2021
435
177
Somewhere in Universe
Love all the fanbois in this thread.

“it’s no big deal. Only impacted a few thousand $130K cars.”

or

“it’s no big deal. They are going to pay you $600 after 3 years of telling you to **** off and there’s nothing wrong with your car.”

This is a case of Tesla WILLFULLY crippling vehicles and LYING to customers (especially early adopters) about it. IMO they should be paying A LOT more to impacted owners.
It was temporary thing read the article
 

hill

Active Member
Apr 21, 2015
1,334
692
Lake Forest, CA
“Tesla has also attempted to fix the issue for owners”

Bull. Shitt.

I wound up selling my car because Tesla refused to do anything to fix it and it became absolutely useless except for driving around town.

Hopefully former owners will be compensate. I have 6+ Service tickets in my vehicle history for the issue.
what? you mean the SC that told us, "that's normal" lied?
ha - who knew
"... They are still reduced. Are you impacted by chargegate? Sounds like you’re not. Next. ...."
he joined this year. the pixi dust hasnt yet met reality. Wait 'till his half shafts begin to shudder.
;)
.
 
Last edited:

glide

Active Member
Jun 6, 2018
3,662
3,827
USA
It was temporary thing read the article
You have no idea what you are talking about.

I can link an article saying that Trump is going to be re-installed as president next week. Doesn’t make it true. But it does make the people who believe it foolish.
 

tpoltron

Member
May 12, 2013
385
490
Cupertino, CA
If it is not true why is payout only for 1.7 k cars?

Probably Tesla’s way of minimizing their payout. As a settlement maybe they agreed something like ’we will compensate owners who suffered an instant range drop greater than 15%’. Unfortunately as ucmndd notes this is unlikely to help those of us who were more affected by reduced charging speeds. By not being explicit on the criteria Tesla gets a lot of wiggle room to deny claims.

Its sad to see Tesla burn off so much good will among us early supporters.
 
Last edited:

WhiteWi

Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Feb 21, 2021
435
177
Somewhere in Universe
Probably Tesla’s way of minimizing their payout. As a settlement maybe they agreed something like ’we will compensate owners who suffered an instant range drop greater than 15%’. Unfortunately as ucmndd notes this is unlikely to help those of us who were more affected by reduced charging speeds. By not being explicit on the criteria Tesla gets a lot of wiggle room to deny claims.

Its sad to see Tesla burn off so much good will among us early supporters.
It looks like range drop was as low as 11%. Don’t know where you got your 15% claim out.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: glide

ucmndd

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2016
6,904
13,045
California
Probably Tesla’s way of minimizing their payout. As a settlement maybe they agreed something like ’we will compensate owners who suffered an instant range drop greater than 15%’.
Sorta, but not exactly. Tesla knows precisely how many cars were affected because they specifically identified a set of cars with a given set of hardware/conditions and artificially capped their battery to address an issue. Later software updates addressed said issue and restored the range.

The lawsuit is very specific, covering exactly this situation and the associated range loss. It has absolutely nothing to do with slow supercharging speeds or anything else.
 

Doanster1

Active Member
Feb 14, 2018
1,027
558
Oregon
Let’s see if I get notified. Range of 241 was rock steady for a couple years. Dropped to 230 after the update, so not as bad as 11%. Honestly have not charged to 100% since then because the coolant heater pump running full bore (for me anyway) post-90% made it a wash. Will have to do so soon and see if any of the range has indeed been restored. Not even sure if I can get to 100%. Reviewed snapshots/screen grabs and the last time I set it to 100%, it stopped at 98%…
 

Products we're discussing on TMC...