How to sue Tesla over historical claims

[gearchruncher]

I sued Tesla in small claims and won. Twice! You can too. I had two claims:

1. I have a car with AP2.5. Tesla advertised this car as having “all hardware needed for full self driving capability.” When I went to subscribe to “Full Self Driving Capability,” Tesla required a $1,000 hardware upgrade to subscribe to this, while calling the upgrade hardware the “Full Self Driving Computer.” Clearly the car does not have all hardware needed, despite the advertisement at time of sale.
2. I have a car with MCU1. As commonly reported, software updates have hindered the functionality, such as breaking voice recognition and causing lockups. Tesla acknowledged that the issues were known software bugs with no resolution date. Tesla’s solution was a $2000 hardware upgrade, even though the car was under warranty, and the car would no longer do what is listed in the owners manual. A NHTSA recall prevented rollback to previous software versions.
   1. Even if MCU1 worked fine, it doesn’t support FSD, so claim #1 would have applied here.

I read my purchase agreement, which states that an owner can use arbitration or small claims for any disputes. It requests that you email [email protected] for any legal issues. I wrote this address 3 times over many weeks, with no response.

Without a response, I filed a small claims case. I properly served Tesla’s registered agent in my state, and then appeared in court (via zoom!) on the appointed date. Tesla made no arguments to defend against my claims, as they did not appear for the hearings.

The Judge reviewed my situation based on the evidence I provided, which included Tesla’s own claims on their website, owners manuals, service estimates, and their descriptions of the Infotainment and Full Self Driving computer upgrades. The Judge agreed that the first claim was false advertising and the second was a breech of warranty, finding for me in full ($3000+tax).

To Tesla’s credit, when I sent the judgment to their resolutions email address, they did pay the amount in full within a few weeks.

You can do this too if you feel Tesla’s policies are unfair. In almost every jurisdiction in the USA you can use small claims for disagreements such as this. The process is easy, and only takes a few hours of your time overall. Lots of places allow you to file online and attend court via Zoom. Most states don’t allow lawyers in small claims, so Tesla won’t have a lawyer on the other side if someone does bother to show up, just a local rep.

You can do this even if you didn’t opt out of Tesla’s arbitration agreement, as the Purchase Agreement specifically allows Small Claims as a method of resolution in all cases. You also have the option of using arbitration, which costs nothing and Tesla pays all fees. Worst case is you don’t win.

DM me if you want any help.

Note: I don’t hate Tesla. I think their cars and mission are great. I just believe they should be held to promises made as part of the sales process or warranty, and the more people that hold them too it, the better they will get in the future,

 

[2101Guy]

THIS needs to be a sticky. I’ve LONG mentioned the benefits (and ease) of small claims court. That is all that I can say (legal reasons) as it relates to my own experience.

But MANY of you should take heed to gear crunchers post. Trust me, take heed to it.

 

[2101Guy]

To those (moderator edit) who’ve been quoting fine print in Tesla’s documents and claiming “It doesn’t matter what was on the website or what their CEO has stated, publicly and tweeted, it’s whats in the details of the purchase contract with FSD. That is the only thing that legally matters.” Or “You really expect the hardware in the car to last forever and you never have to pay for hardware upgrades? That is on you per the Tesla contract, to always pay for FSD related hardware upgrades”

Guess again.

 

[Krash]

If I were Tesla and cared to fight you, the first argument I would make is that FSD Beta isn’t FSD and that maybe when the neural net gets reduced FSD could run on HW2.5. Curious as to whether you think the judge would have still found in your favor if someone competent had shown up to oppose you.

Would you have still asked for MCU2 if the FSDBeta had been released for MCU1?

Anyone know if judges in small claims court look up legal precedent if there is no one opposing?

(Note: No way do I think the NN reduction gets released on HW 2.5. “I’m just saying there’s a chance.”)

 

[EarlyM3Owner]

wow this is gold. everyone needs to know this.

 

[EarlyM3Owner]

If I were Tesla and cared to fight you, the first argument I would make is FSD Beta isn’t FSD and that maybe when the neural net gets reduced it would run on HW2.5. Curious as to whether you think the judge would have still found in your favor if someone competent had shown up to oppose you.

My guess would be that the judge would question the service offering, but may still rule against his favor since the intent would be to make that entire fleet self-driving as originally intended. The offering is just a way to get it sooner. However, it would cost Tesla more money to try and fight these small claims, then it would be to just ignore them and pay out.

 

[canasion35]

Nice - reading is hard but thankfully lawyers get paid to read and this is what the details state. Nice work!

 

[gearchruncher]

Curious as to whether you think the judge would have still found in your favor if someone competent had shown up to oppose you

Yes, I would not have gone if I didn't think I could win on the facts against any argument Tesla makes. I had planned for this path of argument.

If they had argued that FSD Beta is not FSD, I would have shown the Judge the app. Which lists "Software Upgrades". This then lists the name of the software upgrade as "Full Self Driving Capability" and allows you to either buy or subscribe to the identical software in either case. The word "beta" is not used anywhere. It then says you need a HW upgrade to subscribe.

There is no indication of beta in the purchase process, nor any indication that the HW upgrade will not be needed in the future. Plus, you do get things right now like the green light chime with HW3 but not 2/2.5, even without a FSD purchase. The fact that they can't even do that today on HW2.5 doesn't look good for the argument that full FSD will work "someday." It also means that not having HW3 even if you don't have FSD does have damages, as you aren't getting features that are purely tied to your HW.

Tesla also calls EVERY AP feature (including auto wipers) "beta." So they have kind of ruined that definition. Tesla digs their own grave here with the literal purchase process they use and the language in it.

If I were Tesla and cared to fight you, the first argument I would make is FSD Beta isn’t FSD and that maybe when the neural net gets reduced it would run on HW2.5.

Being in court means you are under oath. Do you think Tesla can honestly say in court that FSD will work with HW2.5 and MCU1 in the future? If they had, I would have asked the Judge to hold them to that.

 

[gearchruncher]

Would you have still asked for MCU2 if the FSDBeta had been released for MCU1?

Yes. My initial claim was actually just that MCU1 had stopped doing stuff listed in the manual, such as voice commands or even reliably functioning (it was locking up every few days for 5+ minutes while driving.) Tesla checked and said the HW was fine, and said they knew this was a SW bug, and even knew the exact release that caused it. However, 6 months later, they had not fixed it and had no resolution except me paying $2K for a MCU2 upgrade. (it's still not fixed 2 years later)

Anyone know if judges in small claims court look up legal precedent if there is no one opposing?

They do not. You don't bother to show up and defend, they're not very motivated to help you win. As long as the plaintiff has a reasonable claim backed up by documentation, they're gonna move on. What precedent would there even be here?

Side note: Both judges I dealt with in this case were very entertained to see someone suing a massive corporation over an interesting claim, vs the daily grind of dealing with uninsured motorists and people not paying their bills. If nothing else, do it to brighten a Judge's day

 

[2101Guy]

I can say, that small claims is VERY informal. There are no such things as objections, rules around evidence are relaxed(ex: there is no such thing as discovery. You bring whatever evidence you have the day you show up. You don’t have to provide the opposing side with any evidence at all prior to you coming to court, no depositions, no
Discovery)and the big corporations, nor anyone, are allowed to have lawyers in court. I’ve only gone up against local “reps” (NOT TESLA. OTHER COMPANIES) who were mainly, not well prepared.

And from my experience? The judges really give the basic consumer, a lot of leeway when they are going up against a big corporation.

I am surprised, however, that instead of just not showing up at all? Teslas agent did not reach out to gear cruncher ahead of time, offering him a full settlement, accompanied by a non-disclosure agreement.

The end result would have been gear crunch getting the money that he asked for, but not being allowed to post it in public on the Internet for the world to see, and for others to use in their cases….

 

[qdeathstar]

Congrats. Just make sure you don’t plan on buying a Tesla in the future. Paying out a judgment to you might put you on a blacklist.

 

[gearchruncher]

I am surprised, however, that instead of just not showing up at all? Teslas agent did not reach out to gear cruncher ahead of time, offering him a full settlement, accompanied by a non-disclosure agreement.

Remember, Musk has made this statement:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1421325748158312458

So, I guess since they didn't fight me, logic implies....

 

[2101Guy]

Congrats. Just make sure you don’t plan on buying a Tesla in the future. Paying out a judgment to you might put you on a blacklist.

Actually, it doesn’t..

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

they did pay the amount in full within a few weeks.

Congrats! Are you going to get HW3 and the new MCU?

 

[gearchruncher]

Congrats! Are you going to get HW3 and the new MCU?

I had actually already bought MCU2 out of pocket long ago- the car was a complete mess to use without it, and it absolutely did fix that. So this was recovering that purchase.

Not sure on HW3 yet, waiting to see if FSD actually becomes available to someone that subscribes and races their car (which would give me a 10 "safety" score).

 

[SabrToothSqrl]

THANK YOU! Your story gave me hope!

XM Radio Favorites - Tesla broke it - says it's "as designed". Hasn't used a radio in 40 years?

Am I the only one, who, when attempting to navigate favorites in XM, instead of going Fav1(ch1), Fav2(ch9), Fav3 chWhatever), it goes 1,2,3,4,5, etc? Been that way for MONTHS now. I just want it to work 1. How it did 6 months ago, and 2. Correctly. Service says: " Spoke with customer to...

teslamotorsclub.com

 

[Droschke]

I have a car with MCU1. As commonly reported, software updates have hindered the functionality, such as breaking voice recognition and causing lockups. Tesla acknowledged that the issues were known software bugs with no resolution date.

Was Tesla's acknowledgement of the issue being caused by known software bugs with no resolution date verbal or written? If verbal, how does it hold in the court?

 

[Droschke]

make sure you don’t plan on buying a Tesla in the future. Paying out a judgment to you might put you on a blacklist.

Actually, it doesn’t.

So, I suppose you mean they cannot blacklist consumers (legally)?

 

[gearchruncher]

Was Tesla's acknowledgement of the issue being caused by known software bugs with no resolution date verbal or written?

In my case, it was written because it was in my chat with service in the app.
If I didn't have that, I would have just waited 30 days though. I figure I'd argue to the judge that lemon laws in my state require a problem to be fixed in 30 days, and it had already been 6 months since the problem started and 30 days since I requested a repair.

So, they can not blacklist consumers (legally) as they did in the past?

Blacklisting consumers requires a LOT of organization, which isn't Tesla's strong suit
It's also bad PR to stack on already bad PR for lost lawsuits, and just likely to make people that already know how to use the legal system to re-use that path.
And of course, they can't prevent you from buying a used car. One of my cars was bought used, and all of this still applied, because warranty applies to secondary purchasers.
I'd be interested to hear where they blacklisted people in the past. The only cases I know of is people flipping cars against the MVPA agreement.

 

[Rice&Curry]

Congrats. Just make sure you don’t plan on buying a Tesla in the future. Paying out a judgment to you might put you on a blacklist.