Mine is a late 2021 so I'm guessing even the previous owners wouldn't even have a claim, or certainly not such a clear cut course of action.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
My experience taking Tesla to court about FSD
- Thread starter edb49
- Start date
Agreed Marc.Yeah, buying a second hand Tesla with FSD is quite different to ordering it based on this objective nonsense as I did
View attachment 988339
[UK] Help with legal case against Tesla over USS
We are prepping detailed court proceedings against Tesla for misleading about USS and parking for assistance / aids. Court papers filed and Tesla have filed defence. As it’s a company purchase a bit more tricky as it relies on Sale and Supply of Goods rather than Consumer Law. Our case is...
teslamotorsclub.com
That was USS
Last edited:
There really is no 'claim' being discussed here . The OP got a refund and the feature was disabled on his car, he's not really ended up ahead, just got a refund.
Under UK Law if you could successfully argue that a car with AutoPilot wasn't of satisfactory quality then you should expect a refund within the first 6 years, less a deduction for wear and tear. Again you aren't really going to be achieving anything especially good here, a load of hassle to get a trade in price, better to just sell it.
I'm not planning to publish the Tesla docs, because I don't want to give any reason things could be taken down. If you send me your email address I'm happy to send a redacted one though. The key points of the defence were:
- The contract formed between me/Tesla incorporated the MVOA ("Motor Vehicle Order Agreement")
- The MVOA says that I agree to read & understand the owner's manual available on the touchscreen of the car
- FSD comprises a number of software features that make up a Level 2 drive assistance package
- FSD includes Traffic light & Stop sign control, as well as City driving which will be added in due course
- The manual says certain features are in beta and will be improved
- Tesla claimed that when I purchased the vehicle I knew it would be improved over time by software updates and would not be fully autonomous at the delivery date
- Tesla has made all the features within FSD available as far as it could
- Therefore, there's been no failure to supply goods matching the description
- Also, I've had some benefit from FSD so to claim a full refund is disproportionate
- Tesla put me on strict proof of what their website said (e.g. that city street driving would be in 2019) - not an issue as I had a screenshot
To me, this was a fairly generalised defence and I suspect one they just put in to every claim with a few tweaks. It never reached a hearing, but I was planning to take it apart as follows:
- Primary Claim:
- Tesla in their defence accept that city driving will be added in the future - but at the time of my order, they said it would be added by the end of 2019. This is the fundamental breach of contract, and Tesla remain in breach.
- Reading the manual prior to delivery
- Under the The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, "A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer."
- To require a consumer to read a manual of a car before accepting delivery, said manual being on the touchscreen of the car, is entirely unreasonable and unrealistic - and therefore is an unfair contract term. These are not binding on a consumer.
- Therefore any arguments about me having read the manual in advance of purchase of the car have no merit.
- The manual doesn't remove the requirement on them to deliver goods as described.
- Whether the claim is disproportionate:
- The beta traffic light/stop sign recognition is a tiny and immaterial feature compared to the richness of city driving. I wouldn't have paid £5.8k for bongs at traffic lights!
- Strict proof:
- I had screenshots of their website and so was entirely relaxed on this one.
There was a claim, I sued Tesla - just no judgement as there was a settlement. I see it slightly differently - I ended up getting £8k. From what others have said on this thread, FSD is worth maybe £1k at resale. I could add EAP for £3.4k leaving me >£4k up. So I would essentially have only lost traffic light bongs and the future promise of FSD for £4k... pretty easy decision to make for many people I think! But also, importantly for me, I feel that I've held Tesla to account rather than previously I felt I'd been conned on FSD.
No not quite, the OP was promised a thing in the future which didn't happen, there was no disabling the feature until he got the settlement, the promised future performance didn't materialise.
He then successfully got an out of court settlement based on him starting proceedings in the Small Claims Court.
He made a claim on Tesla.
I think legally an out of court settlement is an agreement between parties involved in a litigation case that removes the lawsuit and any further litigation proceedings.
I praise you for what you did but I think seeing this as a claim is not correct in strict legal sense.
The UK legal system encourages out of court settlement between parties. This is often overseen by an independent mediator. If you cannot demonstrate attempts to settle, the court can order that you pay some or all of the opponent’s legal fees, even in the event of them losing.
Also, under UK law trial documents are public records; anyone can access them (reason why Teslas and Apple go for out of court settlements). However, out-of-court settlement files are considered confidential. This is especially important when you want your personal information and issues out of the public eye. As mentioned in my previous post you have not breached your primary confidentiality issue by removing the clause but I don’t know whether Tesla can still use the secondary level of breach of confidentiality - as no admission of liability is an inherent part of out of court settlements.
Last edited:
In the small claims court, are you certain about that costs bit...
It was brought in the Small Claims Court which has fixed fees and legal costs can't normally be claimed, even experts costs are capped at £750.
A case was brought, it then was settled.
Tesla tried to tag on confidentiality clauses, unsuccessfully, so why on earth is the OP in any way at risk for making it public?
You settled for what you had spent + interest and losing the FSD feature, that sounds a lot like a refund to me. It's like you didn't buy FSD in the first place, you haven't had any compensation for losses or penalties applied to Tesla for misleading you. Tesla should have just refunded you when you first asked TBH, they clearly hadn't delivered on what was advertised at the time, they've backed down in other similar situations (e.g. free lifetime Premium Connectivity for cars bought before the website stated it was time limited, free garage door opener retrofit).
I'm glad you are happy with the outcome, and you got back what you wanted.
I think for many other people in this thread are assuming this in some way means they can also have some cash because FSD hasn't arrived, but I can't see how it does. They would have to either show that they were mislead by more recent wording which seems unlikely, or demonstrate that the car was not of satisfactory quality but would get a complete refund less wear and tear which isn't very good value.
As mentioned - Out of court settlements are often confidential. A ‘no admission of liability’ clause is of ten included in these settlements. Btw, I am not the finest legal mind in this country - I am just saying what are the essentail dimensions of an out of court settlement means.
It is not just tesla, it is an industry standard across out of court settlements. It wasn’t highlighted that much in UK but when they sold 4K TV without any 4K content many challenged and out of court settlements happened. In some plain sense selling FSD to UK customer when the FSD is hampered by UK regulations is similar to selling 4K TV to UK customers when there was little or no content available at that time.
Hi spdpsba. I deal with lawyers quite a bit in my day job, but I am not one myself. Your experience/knowledge of law/legal system is very different to mine, so I think we're probably not going to agree on things. Perhaps your experience is from a different country? I don't know why there's such a difference.
That's assuming there's nobody else who bought based on the same wording, but I did, and this experience report is helping me with my own path to resolution.
Not sure what's the point of arguing what's been gained and who won what, the point is that 2019 wording was mis-selling FSD, and that if you're not happy with that (I'm not), then it's worth pursuing.
Was there a no admission of liability clause included with your out of court settlement?
Anyone who bought their car in 2019, as I did, will presumably have a good chance of settlement. I get the impression Tesla knew they had no chance of winning in court. Having said that, if a fair number of people put in a claim for a refund (I certainly will be) it will be interesting to see if Tesla settle all the claims out of court or decide to test a case in court.
I would suggest asking for more than a refund through. If Tesla had kept their promises then your car would be worth far more than it does today, they misled you about it's future value.
Someone who should know even tried to predict that value for you, the car should be worth 5x what it does today. Elon Musk Outlines How Teslas Will Be Worth Five Times What You Paid. Here’s How His Math Is Wrong
So if your car is now worth £20K, Tesla owe you the missing £80K for not keeping their promises (and evidently not even trying to).
speedyranger74
Member
Not only 2019, in May 2020 was the same: "come this year", or whatever was the words.
You're right, really there are a great many factors that made it seem worth the £5,800 at the time, certainly the initially promised functionality but also the rhetoric about auto-taxi making money for you and all that, that a Tesla with FSD is an appreciating asset, etc.
That fight isn't for me personally though, I'll be happy to receive my initial outlay on the basis that the on-paper promises have not been met, just press the reset button. Someone with the appetite for it might be a different story!
Similar threads
