That probably means that charging stopped for some reason and restarted. It resets whenever charging starts. Maybe somebody unplugged you, maybe the charger's computer crashed, maybe your computer crashed....
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Idle fee scam?
- Thread starter Nornagest
- Start date
That probably means that charging stopped for some reason and restarted. It resets whenever charging starts. Maybe somebody unplugged you, maybe the charger's computer crashed, maybe your computer crashed....
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
In those instances then a flag should come up to defeat the idle fee. Perhaps have a “confirm” pop up on your Tesla app.
This happened to me last week. I changed my limit back to 100% after charging stopped at their imposed 80% limit. This was done in less than a minute. Next day I received an email saying the Idle Fee would be waived.
At the end of the email this was attached:
My car was purchased new with FREE unlimited lifetime supercharging.
At the end of the email this was attached:
My car was purchased new with FREE unlimited lifetime supercharging.
Free charging only covers the electricity. Idle fees aren't charging fees and you still have to pay them (assuming you accrue them at all) regardless of whether your car has free charging or not. And Tesla's system won't activate supercharging sessions if your user account has a negative balance, though they may let you carry one for a short time. I'm not sure on the particulars. The note at the end of the email is their way of warning that if you end up being charged idle fees and don't have a payment method already established, the system may automatically prevent you from starting subsequent supercharging sessions until you've paid the balance. The way to avoid this issue is to set up the payment method first, before it becomes a problem.
Isn’t that analogous to giving the police your credit card number in advance in case THEY decide you have broken the law? No details were provided by Tesla where the idle time occurred and at what time/date. At least with a traffic ticket you receive in the mail you get detail and a right to appeal. This approach feels like signing over a blank check.
I purchased the car with an included service that was unlimited. Changing the rules now is breach of contract.
I purchased the car with an included service that was unlimited. Changing the rules now is breach of contract.
No, you're perfectly allowed to not upload payment info. If no idle fees are ever assessed, you'll never run into a problem. And if they are, you can pay for them after the fact. It's just that by choosing to incur a balance instead of automatically paying, you may be temporarily prevented from using the superchargers until your balance is cleared. But that's a choice you're taking at your own risk.
EDIT: I can't edit my first comment, but here's the particulars that I couldn't initially recall from Tesla's page on Idle fees about running a negative balance:
** If you're having trouble understanding this point, consider these questions: 1. There are plenty of Tesla owners in Hawaii, many of whom purchased cars with the same free unlimited supercharging service included. But Tesla has so far totally restricted those owners' ability to supercharge by not installing any supercharger stations anywhere that is reachable by those cars (i.e. there aren't any in Hawaii). Can Tesla be legally compelled to install superchargers on the islands in order to ensure that those drivers actually have the opportunity to use this "unlimited" service? 2. You're driving to an isolated supercharger to charge and will arrive with a very low battery SOC, too low to reach any other supercharger location. On getting there, you find that all superchargers are unpowered and off-line. Can you sue Tesla for breach of contract because their state of non-operation has limited/prevented your ability to use this "unlimited" service?
EDIT: I can't edit my first comment, but here's the particulars that I couldn't initially recall from Tesla's page on Idle fees about running a negative balance:
Tesla hasn't promised to positively provide that service to you**, they've only promised not to bill you for your use of it. And they won't, either because you successfully charged and, because you have free supercharging, there was no fee for the electricity or because you couldn't start a charging session and there was therefore no electricity delivered (and by extension no bill).
** If you're having trouble understanding this point, consider these questions: 1. There are plenty of Tesla owners in Hawaii, many of whom purchased cars with the same free unlimited supercharging service included. But Tesla has so far totally restricted those owners' ability to supercharge by not installing any supercharger stations anywhere that is reachable by those cars (i.e. there aren't any in Hawaii). Can Tesla be legally compelled to install superchargers on the islands in order to ensure that those drivers actually have the opportunity to use this "unlimited" service? 2. You're driving to an isolated supercharger to charge and will arrive with a very low battery SOC, too low to reach any other supercharger location. On getting there, you find that all superchargers are unpowered and off-line. Can you sue Tesla for breach of contract because their state of non-operation has limited/prevented your ability to use this "unlimited" service?
Last edited:
I think you are missing the point. Tesla and I entered into a contract for free unlimited lifetime supercharging that was unconditional. Back in the day, us early adopters moved our cars when charged out of courtesy. We even left notes on windshields when someone forgot.
Since then Tesla has created a supply demand problem and chosen to deal with it by fining people who forget or are unable to move their cars within a few minutes. This is the first time I have ever supercharged and had my car finish to the limit plugged in. But don’t forget the limit was set by Tesla not me. They changed the charge limit I had in place without notification.
I was enticed to buy my car with the supercharging agreement. this was based on the existing supercharging network which had significant gaps then and I acknowledged that. My contract with Tesla does not include idle fees. Modifying my contract requires approval by both parties. If Tesla leaves me stranded on the road by restricting my supercharging we are going to get a third party opinion.
Since then Tesla has created a supply demand problem and chosen to deal with it by fining people who forget or are unable to move their cars within a few minutes. This is the first time I have ever supercharged and had my car finish to the limit plugged in. But don’t forget the limit was set by Tesla not me. They changed the charge limit I had in place without notification.
I was enticed to buy my car with the supercharging agreement. this was based on the existing supercharging network which had significant gaps then and I acknowledged that. My contract with Tesla does not include idle fees. Modifying my contract requires approval by both parties. If Tesla leaves me stranded on the road by restricting my supercharging we are going to get a third party opinion.
Black306
Active Member
Are you able to post a copy of the contract? I haven’t seen it, but I’d imagine the contact would say something like ‘no cost to provide electrical power for mobility’ rather than ‘unlimited time spent at a supercharger station.’ So if someone has a copy, I’d be interest in seeing it.
Now, if Tesla is forcing an 80% charge when I want 100%, then I’d be pretty pissed.
srs5694
Active Member
Tesla was sued last month by an owner whose take on the matter is similar to yours. I disagree with that logic, but IANAL, and you may want to follow news on this subject....
California Class-Action Lawsuit Filed Against Tesla Over Supercharger Fees - Oklahoma Energy Today
Tesla is now facing a class-action lawsuit when it was recently sued by an owner alleging the automaker broke its promise to provide free charging of its electric vehicles for life, according to a Bloomberg report. Kevin Shenkman filed his complaint in Alameda County, California state court...
www.okenergytoday.com
No, I perfectly understand the point you are making, I just think you're wrong. But maybe I'm mistaken instead. In furtherance of that possibility, please upload a pic or screenshot of your contract with Tesla where the term "free unlimited supercharging" is defined and where it spells out exactly what is and/or isn't covered. The problem is that, so far as I'm aware, these are not defined terms. Tesla is going to say that Supercharging is something like "the provision of DC electricity from a Tesla Supercharging station for the purpose of charging the battery on a Tesla EV." And since idle fees aren't incurred during the delivery of electricity they aren't covered under "free supercharging." They are going to say "unlimited" is only about the volume of electricity that you can get for free, not anything else. To my mind, both of those definitions are perfectly reasonable and hence charging idle fees and enforcing payment via access restriction is kosher, even on cars that have FUSC. But of course you or any of the others who disagree are perfectly free to try to get a judge/mediator to see things your way. I think there's already a lawsuit about this, so you may not have to do anything yourself.
Separately, I believe you were notified of the charging limit change. When you plug in, I believe there's a pop up on the car's screen about adjusting the charging limit to 80% at busy stations. This may technically be adequate, but it's certainly a dumb implementation by Tesla for this not to be a push notification that goes to your phone too, which I don't think it does. Too easy for people to miss it if they plug in and walk away without looking at the screen, which only causes needless aggravation.
Thanks for the info on the class action suit. Idle time fees did not exit when I bought my car. My guess is that those of you who think imposing idle fees is kosher bought your car after idle fees where put into place so I can see why you disagree. You bought into the concept. I did not.
Last edited:
cpa
Active Member
To me this is just a petty grievance that is easily solved by placing a credit card on file with Tesla for those rare occasions when a person makes a mistake or when an unexpected delay arises. The idle fee charges, while annoying to some, are not that onerous. They just serve as a reminder for us all to move our cars when the battery is finished charging to the set level. I receive text messages when my SOC is nearing the target. I am surprised that you have not.
You agree that you have never been charged for electricity. Instead you have been charged for parking. I do not see how one can be confused for the other.
How would you propose for Tesla to enforce their collection of idle fees? Or do you propose that Tesla should scrap idle fees for us early owners so we can stay at a Supercharger stall for as long as we want, and too bad for others who have to wait at a full Supercharger because we are off enjoying ourselves?
You agree that you have never been charged for electricity. Instead you have been charged for parking. I do not see how one can be confused for the other.
How would you propose for Tesla to enforce their collection of idle fees? Or do you propose that Tesla should scrap idle fees for us early owners so we can stay at a Supercharger stall for as long as we want, and too bad for others who have to wait at a full Supercharger because we are off enjoying ourselves?
When your car has reached the set charge level, it is no longer charging, it is idling, right?
Would you rather have your car towed? A few states have laws where they can tow your car for parking in a charging spot and not charging. California is one of them.
Last edited:
I also have free unlimited supercharging on my 2017 model S. I'm happy with the free electricity. I do not believe that they owe me free parking once I am done charging.
Tesla seems to be pushing notifications regarding high usage superchargers. I got two this past week when my wife was charging in a couple places. No charges, just notifications. I wonder what the interpretation of ”supercharging” is? In states where you are charged per kwhr you could say that it is buying this power. In states where you are charged per minute (varies with initial charge rate) I don’t know if or how it impacts the definition, as you are now paying for time instead of power.
I don't really understand the saltiness from the folks who bought an S when free supercharging was still a thing. I think there's a difference between "free supercharging" and "free blocking the supercharger after you're done charging". This is kind of like being upset that the library charges late fees because "they promised me books for free". True, but not to the point where you're interfering with others using the service.
The Tesla website indicates that idle fees are waived if you move the car within 5 minutes of finishing charging. (Supercharger Idle Fee). Has anyone seen that not be the case? That seems like more than enough time to walk back to your car or notice your charge limit has changed after getting the charging complete notification.
The Tesla website indicates that idle fees are waived if you move the car within 5 minutes of finishing charging. (Supercharger Idle Fee). Has anyone seen that not be the case? That seems like more than enough time to walk back to your car or notice your charge limit has changed after getting the charging complete notification.
srs5694
Active Member
The supercharger where this happened has signs posted on each space allowing 30 minutes general parking. Does that seem like a disconnect?
IMO, that's actually a much more interesting point than whether Tesla is breaching the FUSC promise by charging idle fees. Should Tesla be allowed to charge idle fees on cars that, once they are done charging, are effectively just another car that is parked in a stall which is signed to allow general parking? I think a legal challenge on that basis would actually have a decently good case.
There are several things about my recent experience that don’t wash.
1. Tesla resetting my charge limit. There was no onscreen notification of this. Perhaps because of my failing MCU that they won’t schedule for replacement yet. But that’s another story.
2. Requiring my credit card number being on file. I have no problem with supplying a Paypal account but do not want my CC sitting on another server waiting to be hacked.
3. The lack of documentation provided for the incurred idle fee.
4. The signage of the charging stalls.
For the record, I have no problem paying an idle fee if it is justified.
1. Tesla resetting my charge limit. There was no onscreen notification of this. Perhaps because of my failing MCU that they won’t schedule for replacement yet. But that’s another story.
2. Requiring my credit card number being on file. I have no problem with supplying a Paypal account but do not want my CC sitting on another server waiting to be hacked.
3. The lack of documentation provided for the incurred idle fee.
4. The signage of the charging stalls.
For the record, I have no problem paying an idle fee if it is justified.
Last edited:
Similar threads
