Drive unit damaged after driving in heavy rain -- SC won't cover under warranty

[MS1994]

My MS has been at the Service Center for a week now after I had to get it towed when it shut off completely while driving.

It turns out the drive unit had water damage from driving through the rain. The car never went through deep water or was flooded, but the tech at the service center is saying if I went through a puddle at speed it could have pushed it into the drive unit. I drove the car for a week after this rainstorm and had no issues and the car was garaged when not driving.

The service center is not budging at all after I argued that this should be covered under warranty (it's under 8 years old/150k miles).

My main issue here is that a Model S should be able to drive through rain, even heavy rain, and not incur damage like this. If there's an issue with the seals or any of the components that protect the drive unit, which I've heard is an issue in older MS's, shouldn't that be covered under warranty?

 

[Tam]

...My main issue here is that a Model S should be able to drive through rain, even heavy rain, and not incur damage like this. If there's an issue with the seals or any of the components that protect the drive unit, which I've heard is an issue in older MS's, shouldn't that be covered under warranty?...

Agreed.

It's similar to the problem that Tesla did not cover for a Model 3's bumper that came off during heavy rain and the car drove through a very shallow puddle of water (ankle deep) near the road shoulder while turning right. Tesla initially refused to cover it until there was so much press coverage that it finally covered it.

ICE cars can survive heavy rains but Tesla's refusal to cover damages in heavy rain is problematic.

Maybe Tesla should make that clear in the warranty that its car cannot survive in heavy rain and any damages caused by heavy rain are not covered.

Otherwise, it should cover.

 

[y2khd]

Definitely it should be covered under warranty.. What do they want you to do? Pay for the repair?

 

[razh]

It should 1000x be covered, especially since Elon tweets stupid *sugar* like Teslas floating

 

[KalJoMoS]

It starts to lean towards Tesla’s intention to blame customer for their development mistake, the same matter has been discussed in this post. Worth to read a bit more over there as this guy has seen “water” damages in Tesla car’s for years. So try to escalate the case if able.

 

[rooter]

Depending on what year your car is, there's a vent hole in the top of the DU which could have been the entry point. Later models (late 2014 and after, if memory serves) have a venting cap which prevents water entry.

 

[DCEV]

So what is someone to do for a resolution if they drive through the rain and have a drive unit issue they are refusing to cover under warranty?

Shouldn't they have to prove that the vehicle was intentionally abused beyond "normal use?"

 

[SabrToothSqrl]

You expected your car to be able to handle car things? Have to look elsewhere... Tesla warranty covers nothing. I'd see if you can file any type of legal process...

 

[KalJoMoS]

Shouldn't they have to prove that the vehicle was intentionally abused beyond "normal use?"

I had the same thought, if OP have dashcam (or Sentry) recording it would be possible to prove that the violent driving through rain was just as any other day driving and they can’t blame customer for the problem. But it seems the driving happened quite a bit time ago so...

 

[DCEV]

I had the same thought, if OP have dashcam (or Sentry) recording it would be possible to prove that the violent driving through rain was just as any other day driving and they can’t blame customer for the problem. But it seems the driving happened quite a bit time ago so...

Except the built in dashcam buffer is only one hour or otherwise you have to press the button to save just the last 10 minutes.

Given how we all drive in rain, it seems this "water argument" can be used to essentially not honor the entire drivetrain warranty!!!

I feel like they need t prove the vehicle was subject to "abnormal abuse" to avoid warranty responsibility rather than some abstract unproven theory that the car was essentially abused beyond normal use.

Isn't there a legal rationale for expecting the warranty to be valid under "normal use?"

 

[pabla]

So what is Tesla saying happened to your car then? Are they saying its been flooded? If thats what they are claiming ask for proof of that other than the DU, if water makes its' way into the DU its bound to make it in the interior and other components of the car. If they can't prove it, its simply a manufacturing error or something that needs to be replaced under warranty.

 

[MP3Mike]

So what is Tesla saying happened to your car then? Are they saying its been flooded? If thats what they are claiming ask for proof of that other than the DU, if water makes its' way into the DU its bound to make it in the interior and other components of the car. If they can't prove it, its simply a manufacturing error or something that needs to be replaced under warranty.

The warranty has limitations:

Tesla will say you had to drive through "deep water" to get the water in the motor. But what is "deep water"? And of course the speed you drive through the water changes how much impact it will have on the car...

 

[pabla]

The warranty has limitations:
View attachment 709649

Tesla will say you had to drive through "deep water" to get the water in the motor. But what is "deep water"? And of course the speed you drive through the water changes how much impact it will have on the car...

Very true, its a bit of a vague statement on Tesla's part but that leaves the SC at the discretion of deep water then. I would still definitely push for an under warranty repair though

 

[blodg1]

Go ahead and make an insurance claim. It would be a comprehensive loss. The insurance company can do the investigating and take legal action if they want their money back.

 

[DCEV]

Very true, its a bit of a vague statement on Tesla's part but that leaves the SC at the discretion of deep water then. I would still definitely push for an under warranty repair though

I still feel they need to prove that the drive unit failed due to abuse/abnormal water situation and not because the drive unit seal failed under normal use.

 

[David.85D]

Every time someone at Tesla says something boneheaded like this, a fairy loses its wings

 

[DrDabbles]

Contact a lawyer, have them write a strongly worded letter, and have it sent certified mail. The service manager is full of it, and unless they can show you intentionally abused the vehicle, they're going to be repairing it for you.

Sorry this is going to cost you money.

 

[yodacox]

The warranty has limitations:
View attachment 709649

Tesla will say you had to drive through "deep water" to get the water in the motor. But what is "deep water"? And of course the speed you drive through the water changes how much impact it will have on the car...

Normally, a definition of a deep water is water above the lower door line, if water enters your car's interior. I completely agree that this failure should be covered by the warranty. I just had a similar situation.

2015 Model S D85 Battery Warranty

I have 2015 S 85D. A couple of weeks ago I drove through torrential rain. It was really raining heavily - I could only drive at 25mph. I did not drive into a puddle, but there was a layer of water on roadway. I received "Car may not restart - service required message on MCU. I pulled into a gas...

teslamotorsclub.com

 

[yodacox]

This is the current situation with my model S. I also drove through a heavy rain. Not standing water or a puddle

2015 Model S D85 Battery Warranty

I have 2015 S 85D. A couple of weeks ago I drove through torrential rain. It was really raining heavily - I could only drive at 25mph. I did not drive into a puddle, but there was a layer of water on roadway. I received "Car may not restart - service required message on MCU. I pulled into a gas...

teslamotorsclub.com

 

[yodacox]

See the screenshot of Elon insisting that you're covered. Alternatively, you can file a claim for flood under comprehensive provision of your insurance policy