-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Arbitration decision of my PCS dispute
- Thread starter Yanquetino
- Start date
The thing you quoted isn't in this thread at all, so where did it come from?
If what you quoted was around a warranty repair, no state requires that. Only some states if you pay out of pocket do you have this right.
Both of these statements are pointless on their own without additional information. Giving additional information as to why you believe Tesla violated some legal right, and what specific legal statute may have been violated would be much more helpful. Just saying "I believe that violated a law" without specifying anything is unhelpful.
davewill
Active Member
From his link to the complete story of the repair. It wasn't a warranty repair. I noted that it depended on his state laws.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
You can Google the specific law section yourself if you want, I'm just saying that such a law exists in California (as others point out for out of warranty cases specifically where owner is paying out of pocket). I only know this from previous discussions. We are not lawyers here so you can't expect every poster to post the exact legal references and do all the work for you (and as always this is not legal advice).
cmy4x4
Member
The owner of the vehicle OWNS the physical defective part and the new part he purchased to replace it. Why would Tesla have any say in whether the OWNER could keep his defective part?
OP is in Utah, as shown in their profile.
Utah has a law requiring return of defective part:
But remember, @ucmndd tells us that if you ask, Tesla will magically invent a core charge, and there's nothing you can do about it.
Utah has a law requiring return of defective part:
It's actually even better in Utah than CA- CA requires a request by the consumer before repair, Utah requires active disclosure by the service company.
But remember, @ucmndd tells us that if you ask, Tesla will magically invent a core charge, and there's nothing you can do about it.
Ahh yes, the "google it yourself" tactic.
Your statement made the implication that you knew for an absolute fact that California has some legal statute concerning a *specific* consumer right but when confronted about not giving specifics you just go "google it". If it was so easy to google, why couldn't you just provide the reference to make it easy for someone to look at? I still maintain that was not a helpful statement...for multiple reasons.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Here it is from about 5 seconds of google:
Section 9884.10 - Return of replaced parts, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 9884.10 | Casetext Search + Citator
Read Section 9884.10 - Return of replaced parts, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 9884.10, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database
casetext.com
I only didn't do it because you insisted on being confrontational. If you felt it was unhelpful, you can easily have posted it yourself.
IMO, not every post needs to be fully referenced in such detail to be helpful (nor did OP request that). For example, a lot of answers to questions can be found in a specific section in the user manual, but people are not expected to post a reference to the exact page and section before answering the question, they can post from their experience or having read it elsewhere in the forums.
Last edited:
@derotam This law has existed in multiple other states I have lived in as well. Stating such is valid content and is greater than zero helpfulness. If someone wants to check it for their state, they can, but that is demanding a whole lot of work from someone to expect them to look up and give the citations for it for every state here.
Look, I'm not trying to be confrontational just to be confrontational. My point is that if YOU or any poster thinks that the relevant information is so easy to find, then why not actually help the person you are wanting to help by providing a link, or quote of the information.
People use "just google it" way too much, and a lot of times, it really isn't as easy as one makes it out to be to get to the correct information....someone can easily google wrong or outdated information.
Pretty hilarious that you are complaining about this given that post #62 does directly quote the CA law and links to it.
Seems like a group of people joined this thread at about post #70 and haven't read before that....
I stand corrected.
At least I can usually admit when I am wrong... Guess the people I was complaining about didn't see that either. Carry on...
I got to keep my PCS if anyone is interested after replacement. Not really what to do with it now
davewill
Active Member
I would love for someone with the skills (that is not me) to do a fault analysis and attempt a repair. Chances are decent that there's a common point of failure. It would be awesome if we could either repair our own PCSs or get them rebuilt by someone.
JayPaul
Member
This is my first post. I have a 2019 M3LR (May build) PCS failure. I just happened to open my door (while in the garage and charging) to put something in the car and saw the error. My Tesla Wall Charger which is on a 50amp circuit dropped from 40 am charging to 32 am charging, with that warning. It was working fine the day before, just the next day it wasn't. Would never have known, had I not needed to go into the car.
I got the car from Tesla 2 weeks ago, with the OEM warranty expiring June 2023 + 1 year 10k mile additional Tesla used car warranty. Other errors stay and show up for the driver, doesn't make sense that this one disappears, unless it was intentionally decided that it shouldn't...
While researching this PCS_a019 error, I found the OP posts and read up on them... Being under warranty I wasn't too worried (in for service tomorrow), but my sister also has a 2019 she got new, and the warranty is ending soon. I made sure she is aware to check every day it is charging until the warranty is up.
I got the car from Tesla 2 weeks ago, with the OEM warranty expiring June 2023 + 1 year 10k mile additional Tesla used car warranty. Other errors stay and show up for the driver, doesn't make sense that this one disappears, unless it was intentionally decided that it shouldn't...
While researching this PCS_a019 error, I found the OP posts and read up on them... Being under warranty I wasn't too worried (in for service tomorrow), but my sister also has a 2019 she got new, and the warranty is ending soon. I made sure she is aware to check every day it is charging until the warranty is up.
JayPaul
Member
I do not have the option to edit my post, but I wanted to post a correction.
You CAN see the PCS_a019 message if you go to the warnings menu in the car’s service menu. It is only fair to note that. Now, it is buried in all the everyday warnings like “take control” and other AP/EHP/FSD messages. If I was designing the system, it would not be a “warning” it would be a prominent message that displays anytime you enter the car. Just like a tire pressure warning.
Another thing to note, if you plug in the charger, and wait, in a minute or two, you will hear a warning beep, even though you wont see it on the screen (the screen will be displaying the charging screen). If you open the door while it is actively charging, the message will display under the image of the vehicle. Again, if I was designing the system, it would display any charging warnings prominently on the charging screen, without having to open the door. I mean, all your charging info is right there. Also, the app should display this warning during the charging animation.
Now, this is coming from someone who has had a Tesla for 2 weeks. So, I am new, and am checking my car constantly. I’m sure if this was year 3.5 into Tesla ownership, I would never have noticed, or even sat next to the car to hear that warning beep. The car would not be a “new toy” so I wouldn’t have noticed the issue.
I clearly can see the OP’s issue, and if I was an arbitrator, I would have required Tesla demonstrate to me that the issue first happened after the warranty was up. When they had to dig deep into hidden message, that would have been all the proof I needed, that if Tesla has to dig deep into warning message, how would the regulator Joe owner have known? If they could have demonstrated that it was in fact the user who ignored a prominent warning message, then I would have ruled in their favor.
Or a notification in the app just like all of the other charging issues. "Charging speed reduced due to hardware failure".
If it's true (and applicable in your locale) that Tesla is legally required to give you the defective part, you'd be doing us all a favor by fighting to get your failed PCS... then perhaps someone here with enough experience would take the time to determine the actual cause of failure.
android04
Active Member
I agree with trying to get the old PCS to inspect it, but it's probably too late now. I'm pretty sure the service center just threw it in the trash and it's probably long gone by now.
JayPaul
Member
My Tesla is still under warranty. I just bought it 2019 with 23k miles on it. Original warranty ends 6/2023 but I also get an extended 1 year/10k miles AFTER this factory warranty since I purchased it used from Tesla. I didn't even ask, because I know for warranty work, you are not entitled to replaced parts (I've asked in NY, I have a 2015 Ram with a lifetime unlimited mileage warranty called MaxCare which is no longer sold).
If you are paying out of pocket, then yes, you are entitled to them (at least as far as I know it is in NY). But like others have said, you can get hit with a core charge, but I would assume, they would have to demonstrate a specific core charge, and if it is a part you can order from parts, they would have to demonstrate that they are in fact charging this same core charge during the sale of said parts.
Similar threads
