For what it’s worth, spurious demands and bullying from solicitors in an attempt to discourage a claim is always worth a complaint to their regulatory body.
-
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
Hello, I have also received a email reply today a full denial against my LBA letter, same as Durzel saying reply to Taylor Wessing
so next step is to issue court proceeding I guess
so next step is to issue court proceeding I guess
Of course denial is the next stage because so far you haven't actually filed the claim - Many business take threats of litigation with a pinch of salt because when push comes to shove many just let it drop - and the company breath a sigh of relief.
Providing you have your evidence and can prove - on the basis of the balance of probabilities then there is little their solicitors can do to defend the case.
Solicitors are also not allowed to present the case in court to stop the David V Goliath syndrome - where clever lawyers can tie up private individuals in knots - the judges just wont allow that to happen as its a denial of your access to fair hearing.
If you proceed and they get served you will probably hear from them again intimating they have a very robust case which they will defend - but don't waver, chances are they will make an offer (without prejudice)- purely as a goodwill gesture without admitting liability.
Its this stage that I have never progressed beyond - every single one has thrown the towel in because its either settle or try their luck in court.
Providing you have your evidence and can prove - on the basis of the balance of probabilities then there is little their solicitors can do to defend the case.
Solicitors are also not allowed to present the case in court to stop the David V Goliath syndrome - where clever lawyers can tie up private individuals in knots - the judges just wont allow that to happen as its a denial of your access to fair hearing.
If you proceed and they get served you will probably hear from them again intimating they have a very robust case which they will defend - but don't waver, chances are they will make an offer (without prejudice)- purely as a goodwill gesture without admitting liability.
Its this stage that I have never progressed beyond - every single one has thrown the towel in because its either settle or try their luck in court.
speedyranger74
Member
Standard cynical litigation tactics, I'm afraid! The judge will be concerned about justice, not minor technicalities. See 1.1(2)a here:
P.S. I actually think Taylor Wessing have misplayed it by making a big hoo-hah about the statement of truth, because it becomes like the little boy that cried wolf. But, that's their prerogative.
For what it's worth when i was a defendant in a small claim I pointed out all kinds of process abuses on the part of the claimant, believing it to be pivotal, and it made and it made not one jot of difference to the case proceeding to court. In fact, the only thing that killed it was the claimant not bothering to pay the court fee. They didn't follow a single part of the process, whereas I fell over myself to comply to the letter, on time, etc.
The claimant even went over the deadline for submitting a Witness Statement to me, and when I phoned the court they basically told me that "as long as it was in the post it was ok".
As @edb49 said a judge is not going to strike out a case on the basis of the PoC expanding on the thrust of the LBA, or for minor process issues. It is expected that small claims will involve at least one inexperienced party.
The claimant even went over the deadline for submitting a Witness Statement to me, and when I phoned the court they basically told me that "as long as it was in the post it was ok".
As @edb49 said a judge is not going to strike out a case on the basis of the PoC expanding on the thrust of the LBA, or for minor process issues. It is expected that small claims will involve at least one inexperienced party.
Also, it would be unbelievable to think Tesla & Taylor Wessing were not monitoring this thread. So they are well aware of the specifics of the claim, the arguments that will be run, etc. Can't hurt to ask them if they're reading this!
I was just typing something similar and whether sharing the approach publicly was a good idea or not. I don’t have an answer to that, I would be mindful that anything posted could be used as evidence although to what ends I’m not sure. And I’m certainly not a lawyer so don’t take anything I say as other than a mate down the pub asking the question.
Hi George, thanks for your input and I'm glad I'm not the only one that has thought about this.
My view is that there's fundamentally a legal claim against Tesla. They cannot change history, and history has a clear record of them making FSD claims which they didn't fulfil.
Taylor Wessing have now been all over this and looked at every angle to defend it, and haven't come up with anything that concerns me. (As in there's nothing that I've seen there fundamentally undermines the claims people are bringing against Tesla.)
My conclusion was that if you have a strong case and are "innocent" then the benefit from sharing knowledge and experience far outweighs the harm from the other side having sight of that.
If the positions were reversed, I would 100pc advise Tesla/Taylor Wessing not to share publicly in the same way as we're doing here.
I would agree with @edb49.
The only "bad" thing, if you want to call it that, is there the thread provides a collection of "lines of attack" that they can anticipate. it means they are forearmed, but it's really not going to help them or Tesla much, because the claims turn on a simple matter of fact.
The fact they're seizing on alleged specious process abuses speaks volumes. As @edb49 said - they can't rewrite history or bluff their way out of Tesla's contractual breaches.
The only "bad" thing, if you want to call it that, is there the thread provides a collection of "lines of attack" that they can anticipate. it means they are forearmed, but it's really not going to help them or Tesla much, because the claims turn on a simple matter of fact.
The fact they're seizing on alleged specious process abuses speaks volumes. As @edb49 said - they can't rewrite history or bluff their way out of Tesla's contractual breaches.
ACarneiro
Active Member
So paperwork filed £455 paid , Lets see if Tesla's Lawyers do the right thing...
And kudos to them for supporting members of the community that have asked for it. Or to those fighting for what is right.
Makes a refreshing change from all the bickering over no stalks, lack of USS, etc. nice to see people coming together rather than being divided - as it is commonly witnessed in the wider society today.
I don’t like getting mugged off, call me old fashioned.
Last edited:
speedyranger74
Member
That post reads as shameless thread bumping. Very honourable. Good to know that anyone mis-sold FSD in the UK will easily find this thread to get advice on asking for a refund.
Billbrown1982
TM3 LR 2021 | Red | FSD
Going to combine a shameless thread bump with an interestng little tidbit of news I saw this morning.
cleantechnica.com
Only in America at the moment, but so much for it being a one time only don't expect it to happen again deal.
I wonder....
Tesla Offering FSD & Free Supercharging Transfer With New Tesla Purchase Again! - CleanTechnica
Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News! As you may recall, ... [continued]
cleantechnica.com
Only in America at the moment, but so much for it being a one time only don't expect it to happen again deal.
I wonder....
Similar threads
