Who said anything about lemon law? Was that even claimed in the court filings?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
How to sue Tesla over historical claims
- Thread starter gearchruncher
- Start date
GREAT that the media has picked up on this. I BET Tesla now wishes they would have reached out to OP when he filed, settled with him, and required NDA as part of his settlement.
Too late now. Cats out of the bag.
Hey @Krash don’t you think this should be a sticky since it is good, sound, verified reference material?
Too late now. Cats out of the bag.
Hey @Krash don’t you think this should be a sticky since it is good, sound, verified reference material?
This was not a lemon law claim. It was a simple warranty claim.
Tesla had two cases where they said the car was capable of something.
When I tried to use those features, they said the car needed a hardware upgrade to do so, and that would be at my cost, not covered by warranty.
Lemon law is when they *can't* solve the issue.
This is where they knew exactly how to solve it, it would just cost me money.
Were you involved in a suit? I think you've implied that you were. If so, can you give us details of the suit without mentioning your name/location. No one has your name/location from these forums, so you could give us details while referring to yourself as "John Doe" and the court location as "Anywhere, USA".GREAT that the media has picked up on this. I BET Tesla now wishes they would have reached out to OP when he filed, settled with him, and required NDA as part of his settlement.
Too late now. Cats out of the bag.
Hey @Krash don’t you think this should be a sticky since it is good, sound, verified reference material?
Would argue you have claims beyond the non-refundable $250. When you place the order, they are clear In communications after that you “purchased the car” on that date. If they knowingly deliver a different feature set (especially a less capable car) they need to do so on new orders placed from that announcement date.
One could argue lost opportunity to purchase another EV, higher loan costs by starting the purchase process over 6 months later, etc.
It’s also notable this isn’t a one-off situation aka misinformed employee etc. it’s systematic and policy. For example, I test drove a model Y in Dec. It had USS. At no point was it disclosed that this wasn’t in the car I ordered this summer. I tried autopilot, again at no point was I told it wouldn’t be the same on the car I purchase.
Btw. I never was given a “disclaimer” to sign saying I’m okay with non USS/radar despite edd in a week.
These actions seem far more egregious to the non-legal educated folks than the more subtle things companies are held to these days.
One could argue lost opportunity to purchase another EV, higher loan costs by starting the purchase process over 6 months later, etc.
It’s also notable this isn’t a one-off situation aka misinformed employee etc. it’s systematic and policy. For example, I test drove a model Y in Dec. It had USS. At no point was it disclosed that this wasn’t in the car I ordered this summer. I tried autopilot, again at no point was I told it wouldn’t be the same on the car I purchase.
Btw. I never was given a “disclaimer” to sign saying I’m okay with non USS/radar despite edd in a week.
These actions seem far more egregious to the non-legal educated folks than the more subtle things companies are held to these days.
I think stickies are for ongoing topics. This suit has mostly run its course, but I’d consider a sticky for the class action. Or maybe a meta sticky for all suits related to this forum.
Last edited:
I would have sworn I saw "lemon law" in your posts at some point. I guess I just read lemon law into it when I saw an individual claim against an automobile manufacturer. My bad.
seenhear
Member
I did. I explained that I would use some logic from my state's lemon laws IF I had not had some things in writing. But I had them in writing, so I didn't go that way.
Nothing about this claim had anything to do with lemon law though.
aerodyne
2 of 3 EV's - Defect Free!
You can't change people, or corporate culture, but you can modify their behavior. Greater than zero chance a well timed tweet could get Tesla to add the missing RAM, just like what happened today with Twitter restoring suicide hotline.
You had mentioned you felt this should have been covered under warranty? Did you have an extended service agreement? Reports are surfacing that Tesla is rejecting mcu2 coverage in the esa. To me that just isn’t right as Tesla was paid nearly $5,000 for most esa.
I was still under the original 4 year warranty.
Given Tesla (wrongly) didn't consider this a base warranty item, it's unsurprising that they don't consider it an ESA item either.
I don't have an ESA, so I don't know the language in there. Read it, and if it covers safety items, and your MCU1 is performing poorly, rebooting, or not being responsive, then ask for a fix. If they can't fix MCU1, and they propose MCU2, then you have a pretty obvious claim here. Remember, even the NHTSA considers the MCU to be a safety item as it is the user interface for defrost and heat, the backup camera, and source of turn signal noises. Hence the MCU1 flash chip recall.
Hello gearchruncher,
I'm having issues with my MCU1 on my Model S which is still under warranty. Like you, their solution is for me to pay them about $2000 to upgrade the hardware. I'd appreciate any help you could offer in navigating the process that you outlined above. I am unable to PM you since I'm a new user. Can you PM me?
Why PM/DM? The more people that see the process the better. It's not secret. I pretty much posted my experience here, but happy to help more. Ask away!
What would be the value add of the legal assistance (as it relates to legal actions against Tesla for fraudulent FSD claims/false advertising) being offered by this law firm?
www.sokolovelaw.com
Tesla Lawsuit | Class Action for Autopilot & Self-Driving | May 2023
Anyone with a Tesla that has Autopilot or Self-Driving technology may qualify for compensation from a Tesla lawsuit. Get legal help now.
www.sokolovelaw.com
The law firm makes money.What would be the value add of the legal assistance (as it relates to legal actions against Tesla for fraudulent FSD claims/false advertising) being offered by this law firm?
Tesla Lawsuit | Class Action for Autopilot & Self-Driving | May 2023
Anyone with a Tesla that has Autopilot or Self-Driving technology may qualify for compensation from a Tesla lawsuit. Get legal help now.
So I guess its multiple firms with the class actions re: FSD? Because this one is leading a suit as well
Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP
If your goal as a society is to get a bad actor to stop doing something, class actions make a lot of sense. They allow a few people to sue on behalf of many, and apply the damages from that whole group to the bad actor. They also allow the huge group to efficiently use one lawsuit instead of individual claims. For example, in cases where any individual lawsuit makes no financial sense, but 1,000,000 lawsuits might represent $1B, they are a huge deterrent.
How many people here have actually bothered to go after Tesla on their own? Maybe 3? So the average person is suing Tesla for $0. A class action may only recover $500 per person, but that's $500 more than without the action, and it was done with zero effort by the average member of the class.
I mean, you can always exclude yourself from the action and sue yourself, right? You do that a lot?
You can joke about lawyer's fees all the time, but there's a reason Tesla and every other company forces you into arbitration and blocks class actions. They're super effective at holding companies accountable for bad actions, and companies HATE that.
When you do hear about lawyer's fees in class actions, look them up as a ratio of the members sometime. Often they got paid just a few dollars per class member. You can't even say hello to a lawyer for that amount. It's just that they can have millions of members.
Similar threads
