After what time has passed would you consider an FSD class action lawsuit?

[Tesomega]

Just wanted to take a moment to say I appreciate that.

It's entirely too rare when someone is shown a correction and the graciously acknowledge it. Thanks.




Can you quote where I ever claimed such a thing?

I don't recall ever saying anything about that specific thing/combo, or even being asked, before your post.

If you're asking now then I suspect one of the following will happen- I can't tell you which.


1) Elon has previously said MCU1 is fine for FSD- It turns out that's true for the final wide release- those cars may need the 2.5 camera upgrade, and will get it for free (as already stated) once general release is ready. They will still have MCU1 unless they pay to upgrade themselves.

2) Elon discovers MCU1 is not sufficient for final release- FSD buyers (not renters) will get the MCU2 upgrade for free-- and anyone who is an FSD owner prior to having paid for an MCU upgrade will get a refund.

In neither case would "pushing 10.3" make any sense- since that's not a wide release- and nothing in your purchase of generally released features says anything about being entitled to pre-wide-release software.

On the contrary it specifically calls out you may NOT get certain features while software validation is still in progress. Which is what 10.3 is.






No-- EAP is feature complete (and has been since 2019) though.

Pre March 2019 FSD buyers are still "owed" at least an L4 system.

You can see that fact reflected in the financials- where Tesla has never recognized most of the revenue from those FSD sales- instead it's a liability on the books since it's still owed.



As I've said before there's a few possible outcomes here:

1) Tesla admits they can't get a working L4 system, period. Seems the least likely- but would involve at minimum a full refund (with interest) to buyers. I expect there'd still be a class action here, which would net lawyers millions, and actual owners a coupon for 5 hours of supercharging or something.

2) Tesla manages to develop a working L4 system AND manages to do it on some variant of existing HW- to the point it requires either no (near 0% chance) or relatively easy (much higher chance) additional HW, which will be provided by Tesla for free upon general release.

3) Tesla manages to develop a working L4 system that CAN NOT be easily/reasonable handled by current fleet vehicles (maybe it needs too many added cameras in weird places or something, we don't know what it'd look like exactly).

Here I see Tesla offering 2 options:

A) A full, with interest, refund of FSD (but you get to keep whatever FSD features they did manage to include on your car, like the lights/stop signs right now for example)

or

B) You get to keep whatever features they could do on your current vehicle AND you get "free" FSD on a new Tesla that actually has a working-the-day-you-buy-it FSD system with the added HW on it.



Obviously this is speculative- but Tesla certainly has plenty of cashflow to support these options (given pre 3/19 FSD buyers are actually a tiny % of the fleet at this point) and it seems to make sense.

Thanks for spending the time to illustrate what your thoughts are on this issue. Appreciate it !.

GA vs BETA: For me, the reason for my questions is that when a feature is made GA then you cannot have BETA notation to it unless otherwise you are explicitly telling your customer this a public BETA product, currently many of the Tesla features fall under this category. When will they get Actual GA status, no body knows.

For FSD BETA 9/10.x, the point you are making is that its a closed BETA is only for few exclusive customers who have still paid for it. Fair Point, However, when the communication is "as if" its available for all customers who paid for FSD, that causes concerns and the existence of this thread.

FSD L4/L5.
There are several articles that has been published based on comments received from Elon Musk, that he is actually selling L5 autonomy and none of these articles have been corrected - Several of the features that require to operate fully autonomously (without a driver these will fall under full L5 - especially when there is no geofencing requirement that Tesla is hoping to achieve)

 

[Knightshade]

when the company's representative markets the product by saying "I'm certain of that. That is not a question mark. It will be essentially safe to fall asleep and wake up at their destination towards the end of next year,"

He didn't actually SAY that though.

The ACTUAL quote is him saying he believes the car will be feature complete- that is be capable of making a drive without an intervention (not all drives- and he says NOTHING about falling asleep in this NO QUESTION claim

THAT is what what he says is certain without a question mark.

You can hear it starting about 9:55 here:

FYI Podcast | On the Road to Full Autonomy with Elon Musk by ARK Invest

On episode 11 of ARK's For Your Innovation podcast, Tesla CEO Elon Musk joins to talk about the future of Tesla and autonomous driving.

ark-invest.com

And he IMMEDIATELY adds after the question mark thing HOWEVER..... and goes into the fact that is not a system you can use without human supervision.

That after feature complete you need the march of the 9s WITH human oversight until such time as both Tesla and regulators all believe it's safe WITHOUT such oversight.

And only after all that does he mention sleep.

Where far from the quote you ascribe to him, he does not say he's CERTIAIN of anything.

On the contrary his exact words are that his guess is "probably toward the end of next year" for Tesla to think that's safe.



So no, he didn't "promise" what you suggest. He was super super clear he CAN NOT promise when that will be so, and gave a guess he specifically called out as one.

I don't see them having created a path for having the car "enter seek mode"

The most recent SW update finally rolls out vision-based parking.... (it no longer needs a car on either side to park itself).

Between that and advanced in city streets pathing to navigate parking lots you can pretty clearly see such a path to seek park mode.

 

[Knightshade]

Thanks for spending the time to illustrate what your thoughts are on this issue. Appreciate it !.

GA vs BETA: For me, the reason for my questions is that when a feature is made GA then you cannot have BETA notation to it unless otherwise you are explicitly telling your customer this a public BETA product, currently many of the Tesla features fall under this category. When will they get Actual GA status, no body knows.

Yes, public beta available to everyone.

As you note Tesla has many features like this.

So does Google for that matter. Gmail was beta for years and years despite being GA.

City streets isn't GA though.

FSD L4/L5.
There are several articles that has been published based on comments received from Elon Musk, that he is actually selling L5 autonomy and none of these articles have been corrected

Sure they have.

People just don't want to bother learning the difference between 4 and 5 though.

Certainly Elon WANTS L5. Everyone does.

But the actual words in the product description during the sales process could easily apply to an L4 system.

- Several of the features that require to operate fully autonomously (without a driver these will fall under full L5

Nope.

They don't.

You can sleep in an L4 vehicle.

- especially when there is no geofencing requirement that Tesla is hoping to achieve)

"hoping"

Also geofencing isn't the only thing that can make a system L4.

(though even with some of the quotes folks like to whip out... "LA to NY must be 5!" Nope... "USA geofence" would be L4 and still do LA to NY..... so would "only paved roads")[/QUOTE]

 

[EVNow]

The list goes on here...
https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/

OTOH, he also said in '19 shareholders meeting - I'm paraphrasing ...

- We're doing it for the first time. How do we know how long it will take.
- We may be very late, but eventually we'll get it done

 

[t3sl4drvr]

OTOH, he also said in '19 shareholders meeting

If the CEO shares their uncertainty on timelines to investors in a shareholders meeting, there is no reasonable expectation that each customer would hear and use those statements in making a purchase decision, nor use them over the potentially contradicting other company statements or marketing materials.

When statements by a company are misaligned, that harms the company in a dispute, not the customer.

 

[dbldwn02]

If the CEO shares their uncertainty on timelines to investors in a shareholders meeting, there is no reasonable expectation that each customer would hear and use those statements in making a purchase decision, nor use them over the potentially contradicting other company statements or marketing materials.

When statements by a company are misaligned, that harms the company in a dispute, not the customer.

Right...The website advertisements and videos of a car driving itself are for your average consumers. The shareholders meetings are for...wait for it...shareholders.

The people with MCU1 also purchased before he had a doubt about FSD. Pre-2019.

 

[dbldwn02]

Sure they have.

People just don't want to bother learning the difference between 4 and 5 though.

Certainly Elon WANTS L5. Everyone does.

But the actual words in the product description during the sales process could easily apply to an L4 system.

One could argue most people with Driver's Licenses aren't capable of Level 5. Haha. Level 5 is a pipe dream. For all intents and purposes, L4 is all anyone is really asking for.

 

[EVNow]

If the CEO shares their uncertainty on timelines to investors in a shareholders meeting, there is no reasonable expectation that each customer would hear and use those statements in making a purchase decision, nor use them over the potentially contradicting other company statements or marketing materials.

Right - don’t use twitter statements for the same reason. Check what the design studio said at the time of the order.

 

[ElectricIAC]

And what type of reimbursement would you expect?
By FSD, I mean full hands off autonomy & sleeping in your car. Not beta.

$10,000 worth of Tesla stock worth at the time I bought the car(s).

 

[t3sl4drvr]

$10,000 worth of Tesla stock worth at the time I bought the car(s).

That would be unrealistic.

Reasonable expectation might be either Tesla refunding the FSD purchase (with market rate interest) or if one could show they purchased the car for the advertised FSD feature, Tesla being forced to buy the car back at the original purchase price.

One line of thought for damages would be Tesla statements on car being "appreciating asset" and robotaxi network earnings for the owner. Showing sufficient specificity on expected earnings from those would be hard due to Tesla (rightly) not putting numbers on those expectations.

Thus, I think it might be hard to argue for damages on top of the of the price paid and the legal costs.

 

[ElectricIAC]

That would be unrealistic.

Reasonable expectation might be either Tesla refunding the FSD purchase (with market rate interest) or if one could show they purchased the car for the advertised FSD feature, Tesla being forced to buy the car back at the original purchase price.

One line of thought for damages would be Tesla statements on car being "appreciating asset" and robotaxi network earnings for the owner. Showing sufficient specificity on expected earnings from those would be hard due to Tesla (rightly) not putting numbers on those expectations.

Thus, I think it might be hard to argue for damages on top of the of the price paid and the legal costs.

You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.

 

[EVNow]

$10,000 worth of Tesla stock worth at the time I bought the car(s).

How much did you even pay for FSD ? In '18 - it was 3K or less ?

 

[gaspi101]

How much did you even pay for FSD ? In '18 - it was 3K or less ?

When I bought my P3D+ in December of 2018, I paid $5k for "Enhanced Autopilot." At that time, FSD was pure vaporware, as EAP did everything possible at that time. I declined the FSD which was another $5k, if I remember correctly. I added it for $2k in that 2 week sales period they had in 2020 (I think).

 

[Knightshade]

When I bought my P3D+ in December of 2018, I paid $5k for "Enhanced Autopilot." At that time, FSD was pure vaporware, as EAP did everything possible at that time. I declined the FSD which was another $5k, if I remember correctly. I added it for $2k in that 2 week sales period they had in 2020 (I think).

If you'd added FSD at time of car purchase it would've been 3k, not 5k.

(the after-vehicle FSD price was sometimes in the 4-5k range on and off though)

Nobody paid 10k for FSD until quite recently, and when they did it was for the version of FSD where every single listed feature was already available when they made their 10k purchase other than city streets.

 

[gaspi101]

If you'd added FSD at time of car purchase it would've been 3k, not 5k.

(the after-vehicle FSD price was sometimes in the 4-5k range on and off though)

Nobody paid 10k for FSD until quite recently, and when they did it was for the version of FSD where every single listed feature was already available when they made their 10k purchase other than city streets.

You're probably right, maybe $3k addon to EAP to get FSD in 2018. I don't exactly remember the price of FSD alone in 2018, but I do have the Monroney sticker showing $5k for Enhanced Autopilot. So under today's definitions of "FSD," that feature was was $8k in 2018...You couldn't get FSD without also getting EAP.

Edit: Found this article from 2018. My god it has always been a clusterfuck of confusion...and looking at the article's copy/paste of the FSD advertisement at that time is so cringeworthy. Apart from the first sentence of the ad, every single other sentence is arguably deceptive. I really really really really hope Tesla is not sued into oblivion for things like this...I love this company...but WTF.

 

[Matias]

It has been said that class action is not possible because of the mandatory arbitration.
Why was class action possible in this case?

Tesla agrees to pay owners $625 each over battery throttling after class-action lawsuit

Tesla has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit over throttling battery capacity. The court hasn’t approved the settlement, but it...

electrek.co

 

[gaspi101]

It has been said that class action is not possible, because of mandatory arbitration.
Why was class action possible in this case?

Tesla agrees to pay owners $625 each over battery throttling after class-action lawsuit ​

It has been said that class action is not possible because of the mandatory arbitration.
Why was class action possible in this case?

Tesla agrees to pay owners $625 each over battery throttling after class-action lawsuit

Tesla has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit over throttling battery capacity. The court hasn’t approved the settlement, but it...

electrek.co

Hard to know without going into the court record and seeing the claims, motions and orders. Arbitration is sometimes required, sometimes not--even if the contract requires it. Arbitration can be waived, sometimes accidentally. Most often, however, the court can decline to require arbitration in certain cases where either (1) the claims fall outside of the contractual terms, such as in tortious conduct (like fraud); and (2) if the court finds that the arbitration clause is unenforceable under public policy--basically that in some particular cases, contracts of adhesion may not obligate the parties to arbitration. It's an interesting and often complex balance the courts strike between ensuring that all people have an adequate venue to have their grievances remedied, and the court's obligation to hold the parties to their contract.

TLDR: Who knows. You have to look at the court record and find out.

 

[Knightshade]

It has been said that class action is not possible because of the mandatory arbitration.
Why was class action possible in this case?

Tesla agrees to pay owners $625 each over battery throttling after class-action lawsuit

Tesla has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit over throttling battery capacity. The court hasn’t approved the settlement, but it...

electrek.co

Notice only 1743 owners in the class, despite Tesla having sold more than 10x that many cars by then?

You can opt out of the mandatory arbitration within 30 days of vehicle purchase- but relatively few people do so.

 

[EVNow]

When I bought my P3D+ in December of 2018, I paid $5k for "Enhanced Autopilot." At that time, FSD was pure vaporware, as EAP did everything possible at that time. I declined the FSD which was another $5k, if I remember correctly. I added it for $2k in that 2 week sales period they had in 2020 (I think).

Yes - its only been recently 10k just for FSD. All the promised items in EAP have already been delivered. I paid 3k for EAP and 2k for FSD in Q1 '19 distress sale.

Out of that 2k - they have probably already recognized $1k (stop lights, enh. summon etc) - leaving only $1k for city driving. So, unless someone bought FSD recently, they only have a claim to $2k (or less).

Those who bought FSD when the site said "coming later this year", can definitely claim non-delivery. I think thats the simplest and easiest to prove case.

 

[svusa]

Here- I circled it in red for you since you missed it the first 27 times people provided it to you and you yourself posted it-



View attachment 728018

"enabling full self-driving in almost all circumstances!" Right now, advise me of one circumstance where FSD is not in beta!! None... because almost in all circumstances it is expecting you to take over at a moment's notice! Give me a break... That's not FSD, that's Level 2 ADAS.