Model 3 taken in Dwi case

[Dan203]

My Step Father was recently taken to jail for DWI because the officer "suspected" that he was under the influence of marijuana. They did a blood test on him while he was in there and his THC level was under the legal limit, but they decided to hold him anyway because they wanted to run some new test that they'd never used before. I ended up laying out almost $2k to bail him out so he didn't have to sit in jail while they did this new test. It took them nearly 4 months of continuances and other stall tactics before the judge finally threw out the case for lack of evidence. The whole time they kept trying to convince him to take a plea that would have forfeited my money. Luckily he held firm because he knew he wasn't impaired and they were trying to railroad him.

My step father has a certain look. He's a lower middle class working guy with a beard and the look of someone who's had a hard life. (think biker, but without any tattoos) So they were truly just trying to make something up to pin on him after the first test came back negative just because he looked guilty to them.

So if you're truly not guilty I'd hire a lawyer and fight it to the end. If you are guilty then I'd still hire a lawyer otherwise I think you might be on the hook for the full price of the car and a lawyer might be able to negotiate you out of the situation. A couple grand to a lawyer is better than them seizing a $50k car.

 

[Knightshade]

Not sure that’s even possible as you can app access start it, heh.

Well NYS law requires the ignition interlock as a condition of sentencing- hence why it's so interesting.

These guys claim they can do it-
https://www.smartstartinc.com/blog/need-ignition-interlock-tesla/

Dunno if it'd simply make the app "start" function not work, or if you'd have as a sentencing condition you couldn't have/use the app... they don't go into much detail about how their product works, other than to assure folks it does work on Teslas.

 

[doghousePVD]

False arrest or non-conviction for DUI is very rare. Generally they only charge you if you blew over the state limit or refused to blow.

 

[timp123]

Caught or not, the lack of judgment and indiscretion is the same. Judgment can be saved for those who self-harm not those who ignore the safety of those around them.

Apparently he's not the only one lacking judgment and discretion.

 

[jfinephilly]

Apparently he's not the only one lacking judgment and discretion.

yea?

 

[ord3r]

I hoped you learned a valuable lesson... to take the beater car when you are out drinking and driving.

 

[Jenremoved]

False arrest or non-conviction for DUI is very rare. Generally they only charge you if you blew over the state limit or refused to blow.

It really depends on the evidence and the BAC. There’s a standard of error on properly operated testing equipment and most testing equipment is not being properly operated or maintained. I agree, though, that at least in my jurisdiction you’re not going to get out of a DUI if they have the evidence.

(I used to be a defense attorney).

 

[Dan203]

False arrest or non-conviction for DUI is very rare. Generally they only charge you if you blew over the state limit or refused to blow.

DWI means he was either really drunk and way over the limit, or they suspected he was under the influence of drugs. If it was alcohol then you're right. If it was drugs then there is no field test so they have to arrest you and take you in to do a blood test. This is how my step father got caught up in a false arrest. The officer suspected him of being under the influence of marijuana and arrested him based solely on that suspicion. Then when the blood test came back under the legal limit (pot is legal here) they tried to hold him longer to do some other, unproven test. He never actually got the results of that one, but based on the fact that the DA drug their feet and ultimately the case was dropped I suspect it was under the limit as well.

 

[PoitNarf]

This could be a long drawn out legal process for them. I doubt the car is being charged regularly wherever it is being stored. What if he does get the car back but the battery has been permanently damaged because it hadn't been charged for months on end? Is there any recourse for compensation in this instance if the impound yard was not properly storing (charging) the car?

 

[Dan203]

This could be a long drawn out legal process for them. I doubt the car is being charged regularly wherever it is being stored. What if he does get the car back but the battery has been permanently damaged because it hadn't been charged for months on end? Is there any recourse for compensation in this instance if the impound yard was not properly storing (charging) the car?

I wonder. If impound damages your car physically they're on the hook for it, but EVs are so new they may not be equipped to properly store a Tesla without damaging the battery. (just plugging it into a 110v outlet would be enough to keep it alive)

 

[ElectricIAC]

My Step Father was recently taken to jail for DWI because the officer "suspected" that he was under the influence of marijuana. They did a blood test on him while he was in there and his THC level was under the legal limit, but they decided to hold him anyway because they wanted to run some new test that they'd never used before. I ended up laying out almost $2k to bail him out so he didn't have to sit in jail while they did this new test. It took them nearly 4 months of continuances and other stall tactics before the judge finally threw out the case for lack of evidence. The whole time they kept trying to convince him to take a plea that would have forfeited my money. Luckily he held firm because he knew he wasn't impaired and they were trying to railroad him.

My step father has a certain look. He's a lower middle class working guy with a beard and the look of someone who's had a hard life. (think biker, but without any tattoos) So they were truly just trying to make something up to pin on him after the first test came back negative just because he looked guilty to them.

So if you're truly not guilty I'd hire a lawyer and fight it to the end. If you are guilty then I'd still hire a lawyer otherwise I think you might be on the hook for the full price of the car and a lawyer might be able to negotiate you out of the situation. A couple grand to a lawyer is better than them seizing a $50k car.

Since there’s no buyout on the Model 3. I’m truly curious to see how Tesla would handle this in the event they make the seizure stick on conviction.

 

[Dan203]

Since there’s no buyout on the Model 3. I’m truly curious to see how Tesla would handle this in the event they make the seizure stick on conviction.

It is a truly unique situation. If the OP is truly guilty and the state has the right to seize the car I'm not sure what he'd be on the hook for. The projected residual value of the car? The remainder of the payments? Both?

 

[brkaus]

Since there’s no buyout on the Model 3. I’m truly curious to see how Tesla would handle this in the event they make the seizure stick on conviction.

Would it be any different from a car that gets totaled and covered under insurance? The buyout is at the end of the lease in any case. One cannot just pay that amount at any time.

 

[Dan203]

Would it be any different from a car that gets totaled and covered under insurance? The buyout is at the end of the lease in any case. One cannot just pay that amount at any time.

Probably similar. What happens in that case?

 

[ElectricIAC]

Would it be any different from a car that gets totaled and covered under insurance? The buyout is at the end of the lease in any case. One cannot just pay that amount at any time.

There’s a difference there. Tesla (or their captive bank) doesn’t want a mangled car back and will accept an insurance payout in lieu of property returned.

 

[TomB985]

Would it be any different from a car that gets totaled and covered under insurance? The buyout is at the end of the lease in any case. One cannot just pay that amount at any time.

But the car doesn’t belong to the OP. It belongs to Tesla, who leases it to the OP to use. I don’t believe they have the legal authority to deny returning the car to Tesla. I imagine that breaks some clause in his lease agreement, so it may go on his credit report as a repo, but they own the car. A Tesla employee wasn’t operating the car drunk.

 

[ElectricIAC]

But the car doesn’t belong to the OP. It belongs to Tesla, who leases it to the OP to use. I don’t believe they have the legal authority to deny returning the car to Tesla. I imagine that breaks some clause in his lease agreement, so it may go on his credit report as a repo, but they own the car. A Tesla employee wasn’t operating the car drunk.

Which in and of itself isn’t right either unless the lessee is now unable to make payments.

 

[Dan203]

I did some reading on this. It sounds like in CA the lease company can fight for the car to be returned to them but you're on the hook for all legal fees incurred by that process. It sounds like you'd also be on the hook for the remainder of your lease payments even though they'd get to keep the car. It does not sound like you'll actually get the car back in either case and I doubt Tesla would lease you another one after having gone through that process.

 

[acarney]

There is nothing unique about it being a "Tesla." It's a car, they will treat it like every other car. You owe Tesla payments, period. Contact a lawyer to get advice, but I suspect you will need to continue making payments on the car even if you don't have it, or you'll kill your credit while you're at it. I wouldn't get Tesla involved at all unless your lawyer does, it's really not their problem.

The only unique thing in this situation would be asking your lawyer to appeal to the city/court to have the car plugged into a level 1 charger to protect the battery, but I wouldn't be surprised if they decline. I'm not sure how long it can go unplugged without damaging the battery, but I do think ultimately battery damage does occur, or a fuse/disconnect goes on the car to physically disconnect the battery from the electric system, in which case the car would have to be towed for service. (But I'm not positive on this). If releasing the car on bond is an option (ask your lawyer) than that probably would be your best bet as to protect the battery.

Also, do NOT be an ass an try to blame this on autopilot! Don't drink and drive, period.

 

[Knightshade]

But the car doesn’t belong to the OP. It belongs to Tesla, who leases it to the OP to use. I don’t believe they have the legal authority to deny returning the car to Tesla. I imagine that breaks some clause in his lease agreement, so it may go on his credit report as a repo, but they own the car. A Tesla employee wasn’t operating the car drunk.

Forfeiture of Vehicles - Protect Your Car — Brunetti Law Firm

The owner (Tesla) will be party to the civil forfeiture action.

They can argue an innocent party defense.

In which case-

If these other entities are leasing companies or finances companies, those entities will move for the vehicle to be returned to them as such action by the Nassau County Attorney is a cause for default in many finance or lease agreements.

In addition, it is now standard language in those agreements that you will be required to reimburse the company for any legal expenses. These fees many times can run into the thousands of dollars in a Nassau DWI case.

In addition to paying substantial legal fees to your finance company, your credit rating as well as the owner of the vehicle’s credit rating will be adversely affected. If these vehicles are repossessed by the finance or leasing companies, or if a judgment is entered against you or them, this will negatively appear on your credit report.

So yes essentially it'd be a default on the lease, though he'd still have to pay Teslas own legal fees to argue to get it back from the state plus any lease breaking penalties- and then Tesla would get the car back.

I imagine if it has battery damage they might go after him there too as part of the lease default costs, I dunno.