My experience taking Tesla to court about FSD

[Roy Batty]

Was there a no admission of liability clause included with your out of court settlement?

No admission of liabilty is exactly that, Tesla makes no admission of liabilty by settling, doesn't mean the person settling can't tell people they successfully settled with Tesla.

Do you work for Tesla or something, in the UK we're generally world famous for supporting the underdog, massive corporations and richest people in the world aren't underdogs.

 

[spdpsba]

Do you work for Tesla or something, in the UK we're generally world famous for supporting the underdog, massive corporations and richest people in the world aren't underdogs.

That is an unnecessary comment. These are legal terms and if you are not sure about what is out of court settlement I think the best course of action is to read about it rather than making some off the cuff comments!

 

[Roy Batty]

That is an unnecessary comment. These are legal terms and if you are not sure about what is out of court settlement I think the best course of action is to read about it rather than making some off the cuff comments!

The OP has replied to your posts.

Given your comments about Tesla charging people legal fees and such in Small Claims Court I would suggest you are the one who really doesn't have a grasp of the process.

 

[seany1212]

I'm interested to find out more information about this also, bought my Model 3 Dec 2019 and FSD in Jun 2020 but definitely feeling a little conned when the US has seen considerably more results (more not better...) for about a year and we've lost features if anything.

 

[NewbieT]

FSD refund (or partial refund) should be straight forward in the UK (circumstances dependent). Tesla’s deferred revenue accounting tells us they’ve made provision for these already.

However, the UK system is about restoring the wronged party to the position had the breech not occurred. There’s no profiteering going to happen here. Refund fine. Interest fine. Claiming 5x based on Musk’s tweets and robo-taxi…bonne chance. Maybe leave that one to the investors to fight. By all means have a try but I think you’re wasting your time. The hype is usually non- committal. In recent years he (mostly) chooses his words very carefully.

 

[NewbieT]

More thoughts. Worth checking your car insurance policy. If you have motor legal cover usually covers contractual disputes when buying/selling a car. You might have to go back to your policy at the time of buying the car or when the breech occurred.

Also, most legal claims can get time barred. Without checking 6 years from when the breech occurred? Being reasonable you have to have allowed Tesla to deliver on their FSD promise. Might be 2 years after you bought your car (as an example). If you’ve got an old MS then you might not want to sit on a nest egg to find you’re timed out.

 

[Durzel]

If Tesla (or any other company) say "Coming later this year" - that's an unambiguous contractual term with a definitive deadline (December 31st). One might argue that you'd need to give them longer than January 1st of the following year to deliver it, but not several months or years later.

No one forced them to make that declaration, and it is of note that they subsequently changed it to the more nebulous "Upcoming".

if someone explicitly pays extra for an option called "Full Self Driving", and the principal component of that - "Automatic driving on city streets" (aka FSD Beta) - never materialises, it is fair to say that they've received nothing for their money. Summon, Autopark, NoA, etc - whilst FSD (now in EAP) features - are ancilliary to the primary function. No one would pay £3,400 much less £5,800 for these other features, particularly in their extremely hobbled incarnations, so it's specious for Tesla to declare that someone who has bought FSD has derived benefit from it. That's like saying a TV that doesn't display a picture is still effective because it has a standby LED that helps you see a bit better in the dark.

I'd be surprised if Model S etc owners didn't also receive promises about when FSD was going to be delivered.

 

[Fursty Ferret]

I suspect anyone with EAP who is still missing basic features more than a year after buying the car will also be looking with interest at this.

 

[GRiLLA]

If Tesla (or any other company) say "Coming later this year" - that's an unambiguous contractual term with a definitive deadline (December 31st). One might argue that you'd need to give them longer than January 1st of the following year to deliver it, but not several months or years later.

No one forced them to make that declaration, and it is of note that they subsequently changed it to the more nebulous "Upcoming".

if someone explicitly pays extra for an option called "Full Self Driving", and the principal component of that - "Automatic driving on city streets" (aka FSD Beta) - never materialises, it is fair to say that they've received nothing for their money. Summon, Autopark, NoA, etc - whilst FSD (now in EAP) features - are ancilliary to the primary function. No one would pay £3,400 much less £5,800 for these other features, particularly in their extremely hobbled incarnations, so it's specious for Tesla to declare that someone who has bought FSD has derived benefit from it. That's like saying a TV that doesn't display a picture is still effective because it has a standby LED that helps you see a bit better in the dark.

I'd be surprised if Model S etc owners didn't also receive promises about when FSD was going to be delivered.

Clearly failing to 'come later this year' is a clear breach and grounds for refund as in this case. Tesla should have just done it when asked IMHO.

£3400 for Auto Lane Change, Self Parking, Summon is a perfectly reasonable amount of money, good luck getting the equivalent from other manufacturers for significantly less. There is no suggestion that EAP will ever offer anything more, that is the primary function of EAP.

That leaves you to try and form an argument that these features do not meet a suitable degree of quality, and I would expect that would be hard to do in a legal proceeding, needing lots of evidence, and an explanation why you could not have determined this within the standard refund period.

 

[Zilla91]

£3400 for Auto Lane Change, Self Parking, Summon is a perfectly reasonable amount of money, good luck getting the equivalent from other manufacturers for significantly less.

Try telling that to the poor mugs who purchased EAP on cars without USS

 

[Jason71]

Try telling that to the poor mugs who purchased EAP on cars without USS

are the parking features still disabled on them?

 

[Durzel]

are the parking features still disabled on them?

Summon and Autopark are non-functional on non-USS cars. They are showing as "Upcoming" on the website as I write this, no idea how recently that was changed.

"Upcoming" seems to be Tesla's answer to everything, it's like a level below beta - where you don't even get the function you've paid for.

 

[Durzel]

Clearly failing to 'come later this year' is a clear breach and grounds for refund as in this case. Tesla should have just done it when asked IMHO.

£3400 for Auto Lane Change, Self Parking, Summon is a perfectly reasonable amount of money, good luck getting the equivalent from other manufacturers for significantly less. There is no suggestion that EAP will ever offer anything more, that is the primary function of EAP.

That leaves you to try and form an argument that these features do not meet a suitable degree of quality, and I would expect that would be hard to do in a legal proceeding, needing lots of evidence, and an explanation why you could not have determined this within the standard refund period.

I probably wouldn't muddy any claim I'd make with the argument about EAP vs FSD, whether £3,400 is "worth it", etc. I take your point that it might be worth it to some people.

 

[AndyWarrington]

Clearly failing to 'come later this year' is a clear breach and grounds for refund as in this case. Tesla should have just done it when asked IMHO.

£3400 for Auto Lane Change, Self Parking, Summon is a perfectly reasonable amount of money, good luck getting the equivalent from other manufacturers for significantly less. There is no suggestion that EAP will ever offer anything more, that is the primary function of EAP.

That leaves you to try and form an argument that these features do not meet a suitable degree of quality, and I would expect that would be hard to do in a legal proceeding, needing lots of evidence, and an explanation why you could not have determined this within the standard refund period.

Is it not more about period of time that features paid for and haven't yet been supplied? I'd like to argue the quality but I've not had most of them so I can't argue quality, the issue is like the OP - time frame of what's supplied against what's been paid for.

Apparently I'm one of @GRiLLA 'Mugs' - and to become a mug you take for granted/expect a reasonable time frame if something isn't ready at time of purchase as offered by the supplier and suffer when a perceived period of time has passed. Given how this whole software farce has/hasn't progressed over the year I've had this vehicle it's quite obvious I'm being mugged off, regardless of signing a waver (these things aren't endless in a time period) before purchase, fact is, over a wholly respectable period of time (1yr) the goods still haven't been delivered - so surely that should be suitable for a case in a similar way to the OP

 

[GRiLLA]

Is it not more about period of time that features paid for and haven't yet been supplied? I'd like to argue the quality but I've not had most of them so I can't argue quality, the issue is like the OP - time frame of what's supplied against what's been paid for.

Apparently I'm one of @GRiLLA 'Mugs' - and to become a mug you take for granted/expect a reasonable time frame if something isn't ready at time of purchase as offered by the supplier and suffer when a perceived period of time has passed. Given how this whole software farce has/hasn't progressed over the year I've had this vehicle it's quite obvious I'm being mugged off, regardless of signing a waver (these things aren't endless in a time period) before purchase, fact is, over a wholly respectable period of time (1yr) the goods still haven't been delivered - so surely that should be suitable for a case in a similar way to the OP

Please don't attribute words to me that I've never said. I have never called anyone here a 'mug'.

 

[WllXM]

"Upcoming" seems to be Tesla's answer to everything, it's like a level below beta - where you don't even get the function you've paid for.

I think that may have been the main teaching from OP's case for them.
They no longer commit to a date or 'later this year'.
One can argue it can be 'Upcoming' in 5 years. Not a breach of contract in this case...

 

[edb49]

I think that may have been the main teaching from OP's case for them.
They no longer commit to a date or 'later this year'.
One can argue it can be 'Upcoming' in 5 years. Not a breach of contract in this case...

I just took the path of least resistance, e.g. what was the easiest way I could get my desired outcome. It's clear that "upcoming" can't mean "never", and the longer between the contract being formed (e.g. the car being purchased) with this promise and FSD not being delivered, the more likely a judge is to side with the consumer. If I was running this litigation angle then the focus wouldn't just be on this one word, either. I would look at other claims on Tesla's website such as the video demonstrating the capability, as other things that formed the description of the car and led to the buying decision.

 

[WllXM]

I just took the path of least resistance, e.g. what was the easiest way I could get my desired outcome. It's clear that "upcoming" can't mean "never", and the longer between the contract being formed (e.g. the car being purchased) with this promise and FSD not being delivered, the more likely a judge is to side with the consumer. If I was running this litigation angle then the focus wouldn't just be on this one word, either. I would look at other claims on Tesla's website such as the video demonstrating the capability, as other things that formed the description of the car and led to the buying decision.

Well, no, absolutely, in your case, Tesla did advertise a 'coming later this year' back in 2019 with FSD City Streets, so you were absolutely wise to use this argument.
I'm guessing no one from legal reviewed that part of their UK website and it was, as you mentioned, an integral part of the contract and purchase decision.

I was replying to @Durzel on the matter of Autopark & al. on EAP/FSD that Tesla currently sells on their website for non-USS cars.
My opinion is that sadly, those who buy a car today will have more trouble suing Tesla for not delivering on that in a timely manner as on this occasion, they stopped committing on a deadline.
If those who bought EAP / FSD on all USS-less cars delivered in the past year, were inspired by your actions and decided to start proceedings as well against Tesla, I'm afraid the case would be slightly less of a slam-dunk..
(But to clarify, as it's already been a year now since the promise was made by Tesla, I personally find the delay now starts to be unreasonable, and would side with customers on this one).

 

[AndyWarrington]

Please don't attribute words to me that I've never said. I have never called anyone here a 'mug'.

Ah yes, my sincerest apologies - @GRiLLA / @Zilla91 - I got mixed up there

 

[yessuz]

Ah yes, my sincerest apologies - @GRiLLA / @Zilla91 - I got mixed up there