Class Action Suit for Battery Degradation

[Uncle Paul]

ICE used cars are sold the same way. Dealership will post the EPA mileage the vehicle got when new. They will not retest those cars to see their actual mileage when they are sold used.

Lots of factors, such as degraded spark plugs, wires, dirty air fuel mixtures etc can negatively effect the mileage a used car will give.

 

[iqless]

OK so if Audi updates one of their engines one year, it's totally OK for them to advertise used cars from PRIOR years as having the newer engine even though they don't. Got it.

 

[darxsys]

So did this idiot adhere to the same EPA criteria during his tests?

Honestly, some people need to grow up or educate themselves. Or both.

Look at you being so smart and righteous and amazing and brilliant. People like you who lack empathy are the worst of the worst. What if you bought a car advertised as 265 mile range but then it charged to 220 rated instead? I am sure you would just move on with your life and say how it was you who was stupid, but not Tesla who advertised it as 265. Then you would also compare it with your iphone and say well, the previous owner must've charged it to 100% all the time, not much Tesla could've done about it. Except...maybe...not lie??

And really Tesla should've just replaced the battery and moved on and things would've been fine, but it speaks volumes about the company that they didn't. They will do anything to sell, nothing to keep you.

This nonsense about used ICE cars also losing range is pathetic. You can refill an ICE in 5 minutes. With an EV, a 20% difference in range is HUGE.

 

[richrootes]

Look at you being so smart and righteous and amazing and brilliant. People like you who lack empathy are the worst of the worst. What if you bought a car advertised as 265 mile range but then it charged to 220 rated instead? I am sure you would just move on with your life and say how it was you who was stupid, but not Tesla who advertised it as 265. Then you would also compare it with your iphone and say well, the previous owner must've charged it to 100% all the time, not much Tesla could've done about it. Except...maybe...not lie??

And really Tesla should've just replaced the battery and moved on and things would've been fine, but it speaks volumes about the company that they didn't. They will do anything to sell, nothing to keep you.

This nonsense about used ICE cars also losing range is pathetic. You can refill an ICE in 5 minutes. With an EV, a 20% difference in range is HUGE.

You’re too kind - thank you

 

[C20916]

Expecting 100% battery on a used EV = ambulance chasing lawyers idea of generating revenue. Also the buyer is an idiot

I wouldn't say they buyer is an idiot, maybe he just didn't do enough research on battery degradation to know he would be getting less range, but I bought a used car from Tesla 4 months ago and I can tell you when I bought the car I assumed it would have 294 miles of range when I got it, because that's what it shows on the website with the specs of the car. When I got it and had to charge it to 100% for a trip I only got 273 miles.

That's when I looked online and saw forums like this and others talk about the degradation. I wasn't upset with Tesla, I didn't want to sue them, I didn't demand they give me a new battery, I just accepted that's the car that I got.

I can see the point of putting on the used site the % degradation, as people have mentioned it's not hard for Tesla to do that. They get a car off lease or someone trades it in, charge it to 100% and put that on the car specs with an * saying battery could degrade further or whatever disclaimer they have on there now. Since EV's are new to a lot of people and if someone goes on the Tesla site and sees a used car that says 294 miles of range they are probably going to be expecting that when they get the car.

As per the lawsuit, if the customer didn't want that car he has 7 days to return it and get his money back to find one that he likes.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

2. The car has a warranty, and that warranty says if its over 30% degraded, you get it repaired. So if the used buyer hasn't seen >30% loss, Tesla shouldn't do anything.

Model S/X warranties state no such thing. You are wrong.

I have NEVER seen a used ICE vehicle detail all the decreased specs it might have over a brand new vehicle

Nobody is asking for this.

Normal wear and tear on an EV includes battery degradation. Even if you didn't drive the vehicle, the battery will age.

Great, so how does one obtain the current state of the battery's degradation, prior to purchase, on a used vehicle if Tesla refuses to disclose it? All Tesla has to do is charge the car to 100% and note the reading. That's literally it!

ICE used cars are sold the same way. Dealership will post the EPA mileage the vehicle got when new. They will not retest those cars to see their actual mileage when they are sold used.

Lots of factors, such as degraded spark plugs, wires, dirty air fuel mixtures etc can negatively effect the mileage a used car will give.

What you don't understand is that the battery is worth almost 30%-50% of the total vehicle cost. Not so with the gas tank in an ICE vehicle. The battery is a major aspect of value and there should be a way for consumers to obtain this important, valuable information.

 

[RobDickinson]

Forgive me but I cant see any guarantee of battery SOH/capacity with the S/X only that the battery will work and if/when it is replaced under warranty you get a similar or larger capacity battery.

The warranty specifically states degradation isnt covered (outside of the model 3's hard limit of 70% SOH).

 

[GeorgeSymonds]

Forgive me but I cant see any guarantee of battery SOH/capacity with the S/X only that the battery will work and if/when it is replaced under warranty you get a similar or larger capacity battery.

The warranty specifically states degradation isnt covered (outside of the model 3's hard limit of 70% SOH).

This isn't degradation, that is a natural process, we're talking about a software update that changes the rule book.

And whats even more annoying, if you look at a used 85 car listing today, the 85 is now EXPLICITLY stated as being 85kwh even though it has never been that, and for many its now nowhere near that. I could grudingly accept 85 was once a model name rather than an explicit capacity but that is no longer the case

2014 Model S | Tesla

 

[Az_Rael]

Loving all the ‘disagrees’

If you want to ensure you’re getting the maximum rated range, buy a new one

Mine was rated 208 miles when new, it now charges - nearly five years later - to 197 at 100%

The OP’s probably would too after a few balancing charges

Sounds like you weren’t affected by the software update that locked out capacity on some older vehicles which is good for you. I would guess the person who bought the used one ended up with on that has been capped by Tesla for whatever mysterious “protection of the battery” they are currently implementing.

“After our report, Tesla said that the goal of the update is to “protect the battery and improve battery longevity” and it resulted in a range loss for only “a small percentage of owners.”

Tesla owner who saw range slashed by software update filed class action lawsuit - Electrek


Balancing won’t fix it, as Tesla was the one who made the change to limit the capacity. As they have admitted above.

 

[Tam]

...As per the lawsuit, if the customer didn't want that car he has 7 days to return it and get his money back to find one that he likes.

Not with Tesla used car department.

 

[leoyuan]

Just another way for a law firm to profit at Tesla's expense.

My Model S85 battery degraded 12% after the Software upgrades in May 2019.

 

[leoyuan]

Sounds like you weren’t affected by the software update that locked out capacity on some older vehicles which is good for you. I would guess the person who bought the used one ended up with on that has been capped by Tesla for whatever mysterious “protection of the battery” they are currently implementing.

“After our report, Tesla said that the goal of the update is to “protect the battery and improve battery longevity” and it resulted in a range loss for only “a small percentage of owners.”

Tesla owner who saw range slashed by software update filed class action lawsuit - Electrek


Balancing won’t fix it, as Tesla was the one who made the change to limit the capacity. As they have admitted above.

You are luck that your Tesla don't have defective battery yet. My Tesla was affected by software update, lost 12% battery capacity.

 

[sorka]

I agree tesla should disclose the real range rather than a fictitious range.

This is regarding used vehicles, I have to agree their used listings are quite deceiving regarding range which is often degraded and their fictitious 70 point inspection for which buyers are never revealed what it includes nor provided any documentation of actual completion.

Not what the suit is about.

 

[Tam]

That's the problem about hiding the secret of intentional software limited battery capacity / range.

Tesla should have disclosed a few weeks in advance:

"Your upcoming software update will reduce your battery capacity and range as a caution because we don't want you to star in a repeat for the viral video of Shanghai spontaneous fire."

Then when it's time to update the firmware, Tesla should repeat that warning.

"Do you accept the reduced capacity / range about 12-20% and worse?"

The problem with transparency is who would be crazy enough to accept a range reduction?

But at least, if they decline then it's on them with any spontaneous fire!

 

[VT_EE]

Absolutely have to agree with this laswsuit. Tesla is being shady with their used fleet and they should be expected to do better. Since when is it wrong to have basic consumer protections? Tesla has data on all of these cars and knows the CAC value for each battery. It knows exactly the range for every car and should disclose as much. Just because such information was not relevant in ICE industry does not apply here. Range is absolutely germane to an EV's value. Nobody is asking for information Tesla doesn't already have.

Stop arguing against your own best interests. Only in America do people do this to themselves.

They should advertise the current usable battery capacity when selling used cars. This value could then be translated to usable miles. As you said, pulling it off the CAN is not hard.

 

[GeorgeSymonds]

They should advertise the current usable battery capacity when selling used cars. This value could then be translated to usable miles. As you said, pulling it off the CAN is not hard.

See my post a few above - they're actually quoting a kwh capacity on used adverts now, they're stating 85kwh on a 85, only it didn't have that when the battery was new.

 

[VT_EE]

See my post a few above - they're actually quoting a kwh capacity on used adverts now, they're stating 85kwh on a 85, only it didn't have that when the battery was new.

Clarify: advertise current useable capacity and mileage. The capacity when new is a worthless metric.

 

[GeorgeSymonds]

Clarify: advertise current useable capacity and mileage. The capacity when new is a worthless metric.

I know what you're saying, my point is they're quoting a capacity that wasn't even available when new. let alone what it currently is.

 

[richrootes]

Have we skewed off in to some ‘I’m Entitled’ alternate timeline or something?

These cars have batteries - which degrade over time

When assembled, the battery packs were capable a certain output and could charge at a certain rate - according to the data they had at the time

With more recent data, the manufacturer has taken steps to limit owners’ exposure to new potential hazards via a software update

Unfortunately, in some cases this may have reduced range and increased Supercharger charging times

Maybe this should have been communicated to customers, but anyone road tripping who doesn’t leave themselves a reasonable buffer is asking for trouble. In normal day to day use, no one is going to notice - especially if you set your display to %

A lawsuit is only going to serve to make the lawyers involved even more wealthy than they probably already are, and generate negative press for one of the only companies in the world that is trying to make a difference

Shame on you whiners - just accept it and move on

 

[Tam]

...Maybe this should have been communicated to customers...

Communication is a good thing.

Tesla staff should not cut off customers by saying: That range is perfectly normal. 166 miles is 90% when it's actually 100%. Why don't you turn your A/C off and raise windows up to increase range...

Instead, Tesla should have brought customers in and explain the problem with them and let them involved in the problem-solving process: I see that 166 miles are indeed not 90% but 100%. I see there's a degradation of 20% so let me pull up the chart of other cars so you can see how yours comparing to others, let me propose some remedies, what remedies would be acceptable to you?...

When Tesla pushes customers away with their dismissals, where do you think the customers would go to get some sympathetic ears?

It's not rocket science!