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

[S4WRXTTCS]

Disagree. People paid for FSD, not a faster computer.
Additionally, people may well have bought a HW2 MS or MX (late 2016) instead of a HW1 MS or MX (pre-late 2016) because of its promise of FSD - that is the car itself was purchased, not just the feature. There may be other people who wouldn’t have bought altogether. Hence the cost to reclaim is more than just FSD - it comes down to if a judge decides that they still got benefit from their HW2+ car, based on their INDIVIDUAL CIRCUMSTANCES

We had people trading in used Tesla's that were barely that old to get HW2/FSD so I don't dispute that.

The problem is FSD didn't have a promised date, and always needed regulatory approval. This is one of the arguments I used to try to convince them NOT to do it. I've always been against FSD, and considered its existence a sign of the end of the world as I knew. 2016 was a pretty messed up year when it comes to "what we're they thinking" moments.

All Tesla has done since then is keep pushing it down the road. They're basically making sure that any injured party has long forgotten about it.

The lack of a promise date means the "full self driving capable" can never really be challenged until which time Tesla officially says "No, ignore that. We didn't know what we were talking about back then". They probably will never say that, but they'll cite some regulation that was "out of their control".

By that time everyone will have moved on or Tesla will have a mechanism in place to move them on to whatever the latest promise is.

The problem with a case like this is it's not just a buyer of a car that's injured monetarily, but it's also competitors. Tesla sold vehicles, and they still do with the promise of full-self driving capable, and this makes any competitor look a bit silly in comparison for anyone who cares about autonomous driving. How much of Tesla's dominance of the market place comes down to essentially what's a lie?

So a judge who ruled anything higher than the value of FSD at the time of purchase would be opening up one hell of a can of worms.

I want to make sure its clear that I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not a fan of law shows. In fact there is probably a name for damages awarded behind the value of FSD itself, but I don't know what it is.

I simply don't see the results of a lawsuit going beyond the value of FSD itself. Especially since Tesla will likely settle anything that looks like it could go beyond that value due to the precedence it would set.

 

[gearchruncher]

The problem is FSD didn't have a promised date, and always needed regulatory approval.

Tesla hasn't even filed for any kind of regulatory approval yet. As the CA letter shows, they're still arguing that what they are developing right now is L2 and needs no approval. "Regulatory approval" is getting kind of thin as an excuse, especially when it's totally unclear what approval they would even need in many states.

I simply don't see the results of a lawsuit going beyond the value of FSD itself. Especially since Tesla will likely settle anything that looks like it could go beyond that value due to the precedence it would set.

One way that it goes beyond "the value of FSD itself" - all cars were sold as "having all HW needed for FSD." This not being true may mean the resale of the cars is impacted. Additionally, FSD has not had a single value over time (it's been between free and $10k), and Elon himself has argued that FSD is worth much more than they charged for it once it works- so the damages of not having it may exceed the purchase price because Tesla has always made it clear that the price would continue to go up as the release got closer and the value increased.

 

[Ferd]

Essentially many of us paid several thousand dollars for lane change assist.
IMO - none of the other FSD features are mature enough to use safely.
But most of us weren't blind going in. We were gambling on long odds and lost.

The part that disappoints me more, is the bugginess of the NOA. It can make some terrifying decisions. Phantom Braking on Steroids is bad enough, but changing lanes like a road rager will get somebody killed eventually. Mine will change lanes to the right into the path of car who is moving at a very high speed delta. I've never let it do that, but it wants to.

I just got my LR y 2 weeks ago. I’ve put about 900 miles. Every time I test the FSD it seems to respond properly but I constantly feel that as other cars approach from opposite direction, it seems like it zeroing in on a target. For a few seconds I feel like we are
Going to have a head on, and then it recovers. It terrifying. I always feel like it drives to close to center line too. Has anyone else noticed this? I just retired and spent nearly 70,000 wit tax, etc. I was so sure this was a great idea, now I’m extremely worried I’ve made a life changing (or life ending) mistake.

 

[Cyberax]

Additionally, FSD has not had a single value over time (it's been between free and $10k), and Elon himself has argued that FSD is worth much more than they charged for it once it works- so the damages of not having it may exceed the purchase price because Tesla has always made it clear that the price would continue to go up as the release got closer and the value increased.

That's not how damages work. You absolutely can sue for the cost of the FSD plus some small percentage (2% per year is reasonable).

Anything more would require a criminal lawsuit that would award punitive damage. It's not impossible, but will be much more complicated.

 

[gearchruncher]

That's not how damages work. You absolutely can sue for the cost of the FSD plus some small percentage (2% per year is reasonable).

So you're saying that if I buy a car with a $800 stereo option, and that stereo breaks and the dealer refuses to fix it, all you can sue for is $800, not the whole car? It's weird because most lemon laws disagree with you and say that anything which significantly impact the usefulness of the car or the value mean the whole car must be replaced. Why would they do this if they could just drop $1200 in your hand and make you go away?

Damages are whatever it takes to make you whole. Giving the money for FSD back when the car was advertised as capable of driving itself with a software update does not make every purchaser whole.

 

[Cyberax]

So you're saying that if I buy a car with a $800 stereo option, and that stereo breaks and the dealer refuses to fix it, all you can sue for is $800, not the whole car?

It's a bad analogy (because there's warranty and so on), but yes. Pretty much.

It's weird because most lemon laws disagree with you and say that anything which significantly impact the usefulness of the car or the value mean the whole car must be replaced. Why would they do this if they could just drop $1200 in your hand and make you go away?

Lemon laws are quite specific. They require the car to be "unfixable" and the defects to be "substantial". A broken and unfixable stereo might not even qualify.

And in this case the lack of FSD clearly does not substantially impair the car use.

Damages are whatever it takes to make you whole.

Sorry. That's not how the legal system works.

 

[Nuclear Fusion]

The problem is FSD didn't have a promised date and always needed regulatory approval.

Regulatory approval is moot because the beta is miles off working faultlessly to justify said approval
Tesla’s (Musk) various statements since 2016 means they’ve given up their right to wave the flag printed “no promised date” - they induced customer action

 

[gearchruncher]

Sorry. That's not how the legal system works.

If damages are not to make you whole, what are they? If someone rear ends me at a stop light and dents and scratches my bumper, why do they owe me anything? The car is still usable- it just doesn't look as good as before. They owe whatever it takes to get the car back to where it was before- not what I paid for the bumper originally. This is often much, much more than the original purchase price of the bumper.

If damages are only what you originally paid, what damages do you have if the item was part of the large car purchase? When I bought my first Tesla, it was advertised as having rain sensing wipers, and the car I test drove had them. It did not have them for 17 months. The only way I could get them would have been to sell the Tesla and buy another vehicle. How would the law define damages in that case? Well, it wasn't a specific option you paid for, so it's zero? I mean, what did you *really* pay for passenger seats in your car? What did you pay for automatic emergency braking in a Tesla? If those things are broken, damages are what it takes to get them working again, not what you originally paid.

And in this case the lack of FSD clearly does not substantially impair the car use.

A car advertised as being able to drive itself, and being charged 25% of the value of the car for the feature isn't "substantially impairing the car use?" This is like saying someone can sell me a "flying car" and when it doesn't fly they can just argue that because it was called a car, the only important use case was on the ground.

 

[El joe]

This is like saying someone can sell me a "flying car" and when it doesn't fly they can just argue that because it was called a car, the only important use case was on the ground.

We’ll have to remember this when the new Roadster comes out and it’s unable to fly as previously-implied.

 

[Nuclear Fusion]

Sorry. That's not how the legal system works.

Actually, it is. The purpose is (in civil cases) to put you in the situation you were prior to suffering loss/injury. It can also include lost future earnings resultant from said loss/injury

 

[rxlawdude]

Reservations for M3 were placed in 2016.
Would be interesting if a legal argument could be made that the reservation & subsequent purchase was premised on FSD & hence the entire cost of the car plus interest should be refunded, as the owner would have never bought the car if they knew FSD deadlines could never have been met.

Mental masturbation. Not surprising.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

If damages are not to make you whole, what are they? If someone rear ends me at a stop light and dents and scratches my bumper, why do they owe me anything? The car is still usable- it just doesn't look as good as before. They owe whatever it takes to get the car back to where it was before- not what I paid for the bumper originally. This is often much, much more than the original purchase price of the bumper.

This is a pretty good example of the practical limits of it this kind of thing.

Once a car is in a crash of any kind of significant force then it gets reported on the carfax, and its with the car for life. People can make a diminished value claim in attempt to minimize loss, but how successful is this kind of claim? Most states don't have laws that force insurance companies to pay it.

It's almost impossible to truly restore a car back to its original condition after a crash that's more than scratches.

There is also the psychological element as well. Like my mom got rear ended, and it did quite a bit of damage to her car. The insurance company fixed it, but my mom wasn't happy because she felt it was ruined, but when asked why it was logically she couldn't answer. For her it just wasn't the same.

There was no making her whole.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

One way that it goes beyond "the value of FSD itself" - all cars were sold as "having all HW needed for FSD." This not being true may mean the resale of the cars is impacted. Additionally, FSD has not had a single value over time (it's been between free and $10k), and Elon himself has argued that FSD is worth much more than they charged for it once it works- so the damages of not having it may exceed the purchase price because Tesla has always made it clear that the price would continue to go up as the release got closer and the value increased.

For the timeframe I was referring to it did have one single price of $3K because EAP was a separate option at $5K. Even if I'm forgetting about some price change it was easy to see exactly what they paid for it as it was a clean separation from EAP. It was its own line item that simply had the FSD promise.

Having the damages greater than the cost of FSD opens up a huge can of worms.

I paid $3K for FSD back in 2018 when I bought my Model 3 so if I got $5K in some out of court settlement then wouldn't someone who didn't get FSD at the exact same time deserve at least $2K?

We both got a vehicle that promised full self driving whether we got the FSD option at the time or not. It was sold as a package that could be added later. The risk of not getting it sooner than later was that it would cost more, but it was always advertised as something the car was capable of doing.

The amount of people who didn't get FSD far outweigh the people who did so that's a lot of money if it goes beyond the value of FSD.

In terms of monetary damage I feel like EAP was the worst of the two because it had a realistic L2 goal point, but its always been a pile of crap. No one with EAP can drive from Portland, OR to Everett, WA on NoA with unconfirmed lane changes without it being an abysmal failure. At least FSD doesn't really do anything because it does nothing well.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Mental masturbation. Not surprising.

Mental Masturbation is 99% of what's practiced in this section of TMC so that doesn't tell us anything.

 

[Cyberax]

Actually, it is. The purpose is (in civil cases) to put you in the situation you were prior to suffering loss/injury. It can also include lost future earnings resultant from said loss/injury

That's not quite true. Broadly speaking, the purpose of civil suits is to compensate for objective damages. Whether you consider this compensation sufficient almost always immaterial.

 

[Cyberax]

If damages are not to make you whole, what are they?

Damages.

If someone rear ends me at a stop light and dents and scratches my bumper, why do they owe me anything?

The owe you the cost of the replacement bumper, labor and fair compensation for the time to repair it. They don't owe you a totally new car.

If damages are only what you originally paid, what damages do you have if the item was part of the large car purchase?

In this case the FSD was a pre-order feature. Your car is usable without it. You knew that and you are likely using your car, it's not just sitting in a garage with zero miles on the odometer. Potentialities rarely enter into the damage calculations.

E.g. you were driving to a business meeting to sign a billion-dollar deal, got rear-ended, was late, and the deal fell through as a result. The driver who rear-ended you is not responsible for billions of dollars you lost.

 

[Skipdd]

I just got my LR y 2 weeks ago. I’ve put about 900 miles. Every time I test the FSD it seems to respond properly but I constantly feel that as other cars approach from opposite direction, it seems like it zeroing in on a target. For a few seconds I feel like we are
Going to have a head on, and then it recovers. It terrifying. I always feel like it drives to close to center line too. Has anyone else noticed this? I just retired and spent nearly 70,000 wit tax, etc. I was so sure this was a great idea, now I’m extremely worried I’ve made a life changing (or life ending) mistake.

@Ferd since it appears you’re new to Tesla and what FSD does, I recommend searching the forum for other threads on FSD operation and limitations. The answer to your question, is “yes,” it has been noticed. Look for posts by @diplomat33 and wk057 to name a few. Welcome to the family.

PS I have EAP, (no longer sold), which includes most of what is in FSD today, including NOA, which I don’t use because I don’t trust it. I do use TACC.

 

[gearchruncher]

E.g. you were driving to a business meeting to sign a billion-dollar deal, got rear-ended, was late, and the deal fell through as a result. The driver who rear-ended you is not responsible for billions of dollars you lost.

If you crash into a rental car, they charge you lost rent on that car until it is repaired and can be rented again. Why? You just said this isn't damages you can collect for because it wasn't part of the purchase price of the car.
You're making out damages to be a lot more cut and dry than they are. It's why we have a legal system and judges, to determine what appropriate damages are.

 

[Nuclear Fusion]

That's not quite true. Broadly speaking, the purpose of civil suits is to compensate for objective damages. Whether you consider this compensation sufficient almost always immaterial.

Actually, it goes deeper than what you’ve stated - it’s the legal principle that underlies the actual damages

 

[KArnold]

Hypothectical - suppose Tesla decided to offer a 1-time refund of whatever you paid for FSD/AP with interest leaving you with only cruise control capabilities - would you do it? Some might but I'm sure the vast majority would not - that maybe there is still a bit of optimism the FSD beta might get released this year, and if so it might be the true win/win scenario. Heck, a refund might be cheaper than a class action suit. Releasing FSD beta even cheaper than that and likely the plan before any potential law suit gets legs.

It's hard to speculate how such an irrational company strategizes.