Door Pillar Cameras Blinded. Customer Service Problem.

[Zakalwe]

Pages 207 and 208 of the owners manual:
"Camera blocked or blinded
Clean camera or wait for it to regain visibility
One or more of the vehicle cameras is blocked or blinded due to external conditions. When the cameras cannot provide accurate visual information, some or all Autopilot features may be temporarily restricted.
Cameras can be blocked or blinded due to many factors that include:
• Dirt or debris on the camera surface
• Environmental conditions like rain, fog, snow, or dew
• Bright sunlight or glare from another light source
• Condensation (water droplets or mist) on the camera surface
Continue to your destination. This is often a temporary issue that will clear up when condensation evaporates or a particular environmental condition is no longer present.
If the alert does not clear by the time you reach your destination, check the camera surface for condensation, dirt, or other debris."

I would say that that is unambiguous. The assumption that the system have 100% uptime is just that- an assumption. It's an unfair assumption as well- no man-made system has 100% availability and 100% uptime.

 

[GRiLLA]

Again, I understand but that’s not how they sell it. If it doesn’t work all the time they should say so.

Page 94 of the manual

 

[Adrian777]

Pages 207 and 208 of the owners manual:
"Camera blocked or blinded
Clean camera or wait for it to regain visibility
One or more of the vehicle cameras is blocked or blinded due to external conditions. When the cameras cannot provide accurate visual information, some or all Autopilot features may be temporarily restricted.
Cameras can be blocked or blinded due to many factors that include:
• Dirt or debris on the camera surface
• Environmental conditions like rain, fog, snow, or dew
• Bright sunlight or glare from another light source
• Condensation (water droplets or mist) on the camera surface
Continue to your destination. This is often a temporary issue that will clear up when condensation evaporates or a particular environmental condition is no longer present.
If the alert does not clear by the time you reach your destination, check the camera surface for condensation, dirt, or other debris."

I would say that that is unambiguous. The assumption that the system have 100% uptime is just that- an assumption. It's an unfair assumption as well- no man-made system has 100% availability and 100% uptime.

Except it’s not a “temporary issue”
How often does it have to fail before it stops being a temporary issue to this thing I have paid for just isn’t working?
What if you believe you have reached the point where it just isn’t working and Tesla aren’t interested?

 

[Adrian777]

Page 94 of the manual

View attachment 612238

Gone are the days you read the manual AFTER you bought the product. Now it seems, they make up part of the contract of sale?
Also see post 43.

 

[Zakalwe]

Except it’s not a “temporary issue”
How often does it have to fail before it stops being a temporary issue to this thing I have paid for just isn’t working?
What if you believe you have reached the point where it just isn’t working and Tesla aren’t interested?

Does the fault clear itself? Or is the warning consistently and permanently on display?
If it's the former, then it's temporary.
If it is only happening when the sun is low and shining directly into the camera then that is covered in the manual.

 

[Zakalwe]

Gone are the days you read the manual AFTER you bought the product. Now it seems, they make up part of the contract of sale?
Also see post 43.

Good luck with arguing that one in a court. The manual clearly shows when the camera will be disabled. The fact that you didn't bother to research the contract that you freely entered into is never a good look.

 

[Adrian777]

I agree, there is far too much hype around. Any prospective customer has to dig around in places like this forum to discover the many flaws in the cars, and risks being pilloried by some for being too vocal about them, perhaps. IMHO, Tesla skate pretty damned close to the wind when it comes to consumer legislation. I get the feeling that they either don't understand it, or don't care about complying with it. The recent case of the spec for premium connectivity being changed after purchase is a good example, but there are many others, where cars have had features removed or changed between being ordered and being delivered. Few seem willing to challenge this, though, the only notable exception I can think of is the group that complained about the removal of premium connectivity, and won. Even then it seems that Tesla didn't admit to any wrongdoing, they just quietly reinstated it. They even sold cars that failed to comply with a compliance standard they had signed up to, and when they did fix that non-compliance (almost a year after they first sold the cars here) they didn't admit their failure.

I absolutely agree. It seems to me that too many are prepared to just accept that because the cars are so advanced they may not work that well.
In other words they shouldn’t have to work because they are so great.

 

[Adrian777]

Does the fault clear itself? Or is the warning consistently and permanently on display?
If it's the former, then it's temporary.
If it is only happening when the sun is low and shining directly into the camera then that is covered in the manual.

It clears then comes back then clears then comes back. Sometimes doesn’t clear.
I am not sure what definition that puts it under. I guess you could argue life itself is temporary.

 

[Adrian777]

Good luck with arguing that one in a court. The manual clearly shows when the camera will be disabled. The fact that you didn't bother to research the contract that you freely entered into is never a good look.

Who said anything about court???
That said, the law is pretty clear. It is unlawful to sell something that is not as advertised.

 

[Adopado]

I guess you could argue life itself is temporary.

I don't think there's any dispute over that one!! Mind you, with threads like this the potential end of life feels like blessed relief ... we've all made our points on the various sides and reached our own conclusions ... a-n-d ... relax ... let peace reign once more!

 

[Glan gluaisne]

I agree that the side cameras being blinded is not at all a temporary issue. It happens every time I drive the car at this time of the year, often for long periods of time when driving in the late afternoon. I can fully understand the physical limitation imposed by the use of cameras, just as I can fully understand the limitation in rain sensing for the wipers caused by shortcomings in the cameras. This doesn't, in my view, make either problem just something that should be blindly accepted without question, though, especially as few new owners might know of these issues before purchase.

Indeed, in the case of the bloody awful auto wiper function, many new owners might have a reasonable expectation that they would work at least as well as those on any other car, whereas the reality is they work far less well than the system used on cars costing 1/3rd the price. For example, the auto wipers on my wife's 6 year old Toyota Yaris, which cost around 1/3rd the price of my Model 3, work pretty near flawlessly, as did the auto wipers on all the models of Prius I've owned, needing almost no driver intervention. The Model 3 auto wipers are so poor that much of the time I have them set to manual, and then have to faff around trying to use the screen to turn them on and off (why can't they add this functionality to the stalk?).

Tesla don't really seem that interested in perfecting anything, or even just making something that's of what most would consider "merchantable quality". They seem far more focussed on the latest bit of cutting edge development, and seem to pay little heed to the need to make things work well. The non-compliance with IEC61851 was a good example. They knew, long before they first sold a Model 3 in the UK, that the charging system was grossly non-compliant, and made the UK's mandatory fitment of smart charge points pointless. This had been flagged to them by early buyers in the US, who found that time of use charging didn't work, using smart or timer controlled charge points. Tesla point blank refused to even discuss the problem, let alone acknowledge it, and eventually rolled out a fix in July this year, without telling anyone. This was a key bit of functionality as far as smart charge points are concerned, or even from dumb charge points, as well as refusing to start charging from a timed charge point, there was also a problem in that the car wouldn't restart charging if there was a short power outage (despite the manual saying it would).

I rather think that, now Tesla is moving towards being a mass-market car maker, they will need to get a grip on the details that make or break the reputation of a brand. Right now, there are more than enough enthusiasts clamouring to buy cars from them, warts and all, but I doubt that's going to last. At some stage, even the most diehard Tesla fans are going to start saying that enough is enough. Hopefully, manufacturing quality will improve to be at least equal to other well-established brands before too long, all that's then needed is for them to apply some sort of reasonable quality standard to the tech in the car, such that owners don't have to try and work out why so many things don't work as expected, months into ownership.

 

[Zakalwe]

It clears then comes back then clears then comes back. Sometimes doesn’t clear.
I am not sure what definition that puts it under.

Sounds temporary to me.

I guess you could argue life itself is temporary.

On the contrary, I'd like to see a successful claim that it's not temporary!

Who said anything about court???
That said, the law is pretty clear. It is unlawful to sell something that is not as advertised.

And where is it advertised that the cameras work 100% of the time in all weather and driving conditions?

I understand your frustrations, but I still think that your expectations and assumptions are unreasonable. The system is working as described in the owners manual and it is telling you when it is not working.

There's probably a whole other debate to be had about relying on a single sensor type especially when it's operating parameters are narrow (driving in low sunlight is hardly an unforeseeable scenario for a car that is sold across the world and not limited to areas of low latitude). That's for the regulatory bodies to take up.

 

[GRiLLA]

Gone are the days you read the manual AFTER you bought the product. Now it seems, they make up part of the contract of sale?
Also see post 43.

They always have done, see the pamphlet of disclaimers you get with nearly every product including other cars manuals. As per distance selling rules you had 14 days to determine if your online purchase was acceptable.

I don't think it's reasonable to suggest people here are being overly generous, this just isn't something that many people care about. It's a warning due to external conditions, understandable and I've never been inconvenienced by it over the last 14 months.

Also if you've reached the point where you are agreeing with Glan ...

 

[pgkevet]

I can't speak for the 3 but with my S whenever the cameras are blocked/blinded and i pull over then there is undoubtedly condensation in the B pillar set (or mud splatter but at least that's understandable - camera washers?). It's only rare that the sun is so low the cameras are blinded by it directly - and when they are so am I.
pull over and have a look when it happens.
I took heaps of pics and recorded every incident when i went through my first winter. Tesla just shrugged.

 

[Glan gluaisne]

Also if you've reached the point where you are agreeing with Glan ...

That's the second snide side-swipe at me within a couple of days. If you have a problem please have the common decency to PM me and explain what it is I've written that's caused you offence, so that it can be resolved.

 

[Adrian777]

They always have done, see the pamphlet of disclaimers you get with nearly every product including other cars manuals. As per distance selling rules you had 14 days to determine if your online purchase was acceptable.

I don't think it's reasonable to suggest people here are being overly generous, this just isn't something that many people care about. It's a warning due to external conditions, understandable and I've never been inconvenienced by it over the last 14 months.

Also if you've reached the point where you are agreeing with Glan ...

You are not correct about 14 days, but this is a non-argument as no-one is going to court as I have already made clear.
Honestly, I get it. You are a big Tesla fan and in your eyes they can do no wrong. I was too until yesterday. Poor customer service though for me is a massive issue for me and I was telling the truth when I said that for me it has soured the whole thing. I have no doubt you and others see it differently and that’s your prerogative. But all I want is for the stuff on the car to work and I don’t think that is asking too much.
As for me being wrong for agreeing with others, to be honest I am pretty new here (obviously, because I clearly didn’t read every forum post, manual and pamphlet before buying and therefore committed the heinous crime of not doing proper research or due diligence, because I was only buying a car) so I have no preconceptions about any personalities. But if the said member just expects his car to work, get what he paid for and for the supplier to be subject to the same trading obligations as any other company, then I agree with him.

 

[jeffbco]

... so poor that much of the time I have them set to manual, and then have to faff around trying to use the screen to turn them on and off (why can't they add this functionality to the stalk?).

No reason to use the screen...use your voice commands.

 

[Glan gluaisne]

No reason to use the screen...use your voice commands.

There speaks someone for whom voice commands actually work! 90% of the time they seem to fail here in the UK, or at least they do for me. The only voice command that seems to work some of the time is "open glovebox" for some reason. Anything else is at best hit and miss, most of the time being miss.

 

[MrBadger]

To claim 'feature compete' implies the system as such can work in all conditions that a human could function (albeit with actual software fsd still being developed - the honest but delayed bit).

The moment EM claims Level 5 feature complete (I suspect with usual regulatory disclaimer), then Tesla won't have an excuse for bad weather. It may be some time off though... or by the end of the year

 

[MrBadger]

That said, the law is pretty clear. It is unlawful to sell something that is not as advertised.

Which is the basis that I, and many others fought our Premium Connectivity claim over and came out with Tesla changing their mind.

Basically, all information needs to be reasonably available to you at the point of sale - covered under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, specifically if "It affects, or is likely to affect, consumers' ability to make an informed decision about whether to purchase a particular product" - quote Which?.

If there are any caveats affecting the purchase, then that still needs to be available so that the purchaser can make that reasonably informed decision. Any wording omitted that a purchaser would reasonably expect to use as part of purchase decision becomes equally part of the sale as is anything included. Its then up to higher beings to make the decision as to whether information available at point of sale was reasonable or not. Or a bit of goodwill/give and take on either side.

[edited - too long - removed conjecture]