Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

California DMV complaint over Tesla Autopilot/FSD

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

2101Guy

Breaker of Ignore Buttons
Jan 6, 2020
4,972
7,661
USA
Moderator note: Edited thread title to remove the impression of imminent, drastic action against Tesla in California.

For making false statements/claims about FSD.



The DMV complaints point to the very names of the technologies, as well as other “misleading” language such as the following, which appears on the Tesla’s website Autopilot page:

“All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go. If you don’t say anything, your car will look at your calendar and take you there as the assumed destination. Your Tesla will figure out the optimal route, navigating urban streets, complex intersections and freeways.”

The remedies proposed by the DMV if it prevails could be severe, including revocation of the company’s licenses to make or sell its cars in California.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For making false statements/claims about FSD...
I can't read the article due to the paywall.

They won’t revoke Tesla’s ability to sell cars in the state but the implication is clear, and it’s about damn time....
I don't see why not.

It is within DMV's authority to revoke Tesla's license as a manufacturer and a "dealer" in California.

Tesla did attempt to please the DMV by adding on the website that its cars are not autonomous, but I guess DMV wants more.
 
I can't read the article due to the paywall.


I don't see why not.

It is within DMV's authority to revoke Tesla's license as a manufacturer and a "dealer" in California.

Tesla did attempt to please the DMV by adding on the website that its cars are not autonomous, but I guess DMV wants more.
That’s just a really drastic action to take. It’s not impossible, but it’s extreme

The narrative around FSD and Autopilot have gradually changed, less so for Autopilot, but the names and connotations remain. Reading those leaked emails and letters from the Cali DMV way back when, this happening wouldn’t have been much of a stretch.

Those letters were entirely factual. FSD in its current form is intended to be released to the full fleet as a Level 2 ADAS with a (Beta) tag and all the caveats including requiring constant driver supervision. Any attempts to move beyond Level 2 will involve another iterative process and they don’t even know what that looks like right now.

Generalized robotaxis and whatever else are somewhere off in the distant future
 
That’s just a really drastic action to take. It’s not impossible, but it’s extreme...
If Tesla would negotiate to see how to make the product clear as an L2, not Full Self-Driving Capability, I think things can be worked out without any drastic legal measures.

However, if Tesla does not negotiate and does not win, I don't doubt that the DMV will start the license revocation procedure.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DanCar
As a long time Tesla fanboy owner who has used all generations of AP and now FSD (minus now radar, along with a dedicated rain sensor, etc), I have to admit that this a reality-check moment for Elon. Tesla would be much more successful as a manufacturer and brand if they made the existing features (AP, auto wipers, auto high-beams, etc.) work well and get buyers out of beta-forever purgatory.

Then they can worry about the future.
 
If Tesla would negotiate to see how to make the product clear as an L2, not Full Self-Driving Capability, I think things can be worked out without any drastic legal measures.

However, if Tesla does not negotiate and does not win, I don't doubt that the DMV will start the license revocation procedure.
Just rename it to Cruise Control 2: Electric Boogaloo.

Then people would have a much better understanding of what the feature can do and how well it does it.

Joking aside, I wonder when preordering software will finally die out for good. And yes, I know there used to be the promise of getting any necessary hardware upgrades that might be needed, but as far as I know, that hasn’t been a part of the FSD purchase agreement in a while?

Full disclosure: I love the beta, and I’d buy it again at the current price. So I’m a part of the problem. 🙃
 
...I know there used to be the promise of getting any necessary hardware upgrades that might be needed, but as far as I know, that hasn’t been a part of the FSD purchase agreement in a while?...
Many people think that when they paid for FSD, they paid for specific hardware like 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, radar, cameras...

On the other hand, when I paid for FSD, I paid for the function. I don't care what the hardware is: radar or radarless, I want it to do its autosteer at 90 MPH and not 85 MPH. If it takes different hardware by removing the radar or adding the LIDAR, do it and get me the function.

It's just like when there was only black and white TV, and someone would sell me one that would become color someday; I don't care how they do it: with upgraded software, vacuum tubes or transistors, or computer chips, just do it as long as it's no longer black and white.
 
I can't read the article due to the paywall.

It is not behind a paywall for me. Here is the full article:

BY RUSS MITCHELL STAFF WRITER
AUG. 5, 2022 UPDATED 4:11 PM PT

The California Department of Motor Vehicles has accused Tesla of false advertising in its promotion of the company’s signature Autopilot and Full Self-Driving technologies.

The agency alleges the electric-car maker misled customers with advertising language on its website describing Autopilot and Full Self-Driving technologies as more capable than they actually are.

The company “made or disseminated statements that are untrue or misleading, and not based on facts,” the DMV said in a pair of complaints filed with the state Office of Administrative Hearings on July 28.

The DMV complaints point to the very names of the technologies, as well as other “misleading” language such as the following, which appears on the Tesla website’s Autopilot page:
“All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go. If you don’t say anything, your car will look at your calendar and take you there as the assumed destination. Your Tesla will figure out the optimal route, navigating urban streets, complex intersections and freeways.”

The remedies proposed by the DMV if it prevails could be severe, including revocation of the company’s licenses to make or sell its cars in California. But actual remedies probably would be much softer.

A DMV spokesperson said Friday via email that if its action succeeds, “the DMV will ask that Tesla will be required to advertise to consumers and better educate Tesla drivers about the capabilities of its ‘Autopilot’ and ‘Full Self-Driving’ features, including cautionary warnings regarding the limitations of the features, and for other actions as appropriate given the violations.”

In June, Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk underlined the importance of Full Self-Driving to the company. Without it, Tesla is “worth basically zero,” he said.

The Full Self-Driving feature costs $12,000 and purports to automatically pilot the car on freeways, city streets and neighborhood roads; automatically obey traffic signals; and roam a parking lot without a driver to park itself.

Despite the name, no car available for purchase by individuals is capable of fully autonomous driving from Tesla or any other company.

Tesla cars never could, “and cannot now, operate as autonomous vehicles,” the DMV claims assert.

The DMV notes that Tesla’s website states that “the currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.”

But, the DMV said, the disclaimer “contradicts the original untrue or misleading labels and claims, which is misleading, and does not cure the violation.”

Tesla’s driver-assisting technologies have been popular features that help the carmaker stand out in an increasingly crowded electric vehicle market. But YouTube videos showing its systems placing cars in dangerous situations have drawn attention, including near head-on collisions with trucks and trains that require a driver to yank the steering wheel to avoid a crash. One video appears to show Tesla’s sensor system confusing the moon for a traffic light stuck on yellow.

Autopilot, a less expensive feature that combines automatic cruise control with automatic steering and automatic lane changes, came under investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration when Teslas showed a pattern of plowing into emergency vehicles parked by the roadside.

It’s unclear how many crashes involve Full Self-Driving technology, and whether any of those crashes have led to death or injury. Tesla’s onboard computers are capable of communicating that information over the air to Tesla, but the company doesn’t share those data with the public.

Recently, Musk claimed that Full Self-Driving had not been a factor in any Tesla crash, although at least eight crash reports submitted by Tesla owners to federal safety regulators indicate otherwise.

Tesla’s response to the DMV complaints, if any, has not yet been made public. Tesla has no media relations office. Musk did not respond to an invitation to tell Tesla’s side of the story.

State Sen. Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach), who chairs the Transportation Committee, called the DMV’s accusations against Tesla “extremely concerning.”

“It is extremely important that the technology’s limitations are presented in the most intelligible way to best protect public safety on our roads across California,” she said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _Redshift_ and Tam
It is not behind a paywall for me. Here is the full article:
Thanks. Sometimes I got blocked on some sites while others don't.

Russ Mitchell did it again in conflating FSD accidents and FSD beta accidents.

His data of accidents went up to January and by that time, there were FSD but no documented FSD beta accidents until the following month with AI Addict green bollard collision.

One month difference might be a moot point but a journalist needs to be accurate.
 
As a long time Tesla fanboy owner who has used all generations of AP and now FSD (minus now radar, along with a dedicated rain sensor, etc), I have to admit that this a reality-check moment for Elon. Tesla would be much more successful as a manufacturer and brand if they made the existing features (AP, auto wipers, auto high-beams, etc.) work well and get buyers out of beta-forever purgatory.

Then they can worry about the future.
There are so many owner like my friend dc who loves fsd. I won’t pay for it on my new model 3 - I’m cautious about AP due to reports of phantom breaking etc - I’m ok to drive it like a car that you plug in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pilotSteve
The article is obsolete in the claim:

"the company doesn’t share those data with the public."

That was true prior to June last year but since then, we can get it from NHTSA. You can download the data which shows the majority of crashes and fatalities are from Tesla. GM Super Cruise has 2 minor crashes with no fatality.

1659725066864-png.837147



Also, it is confused with AP and EAP:

"Autopilot, a less expensive feature that combines automatic cruise control with automatic steering and automatic lane changes,"
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DanCar
The article is obsolete in the claim:

"the company doesn’t share those data with the public."

That was true prior to June last year but since then, we can get it from NHTSA. You can download the data which shows the majority of crashes and fatalities are from Tesla. GM Super Cruise has 2 minor crashes with no fatality.

Actually, I think it would be true. Tesla does not share that accident data with the public. Tesla shares the data with NHTSA. And NHTSA has chosen to share the data with the public. We do not get that data directly from Tesla. AFAIK, the only data Tesla shares directly with the public are the quarterly AP reports. But they only include a vague miles per accident number for manual and AP. The quarterly reports don't detail the number of types of accidents on AP, FSD or FSD Beta.
 
Last edited:
...I think it would be true. Tesla does not share that accident data with the public. Tesla shares the data with NHTSA. And NHTSA has chosen to share the data with the public. We do not get that data directly from Tesla....
The article's wording may be true but misleading. To make readers more informed, it should have said "Although the company doesn’t share those data with the public, some data are publicly and easily available from NHTSA."