Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

No more free unlimited supercharging for some used Tesla vehicles

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
When will people learn that you have to read all Tesla fine print with the most negative possible interpretation, and even then you have to save screen captures of the wording because they "clarify" them with further limitations (or sometimes complete change of meaning)? Elon is ruthless when it comes to money, so if he can pull a fast one on people to make a buck, he will. This isn't new, look back how he sold us on a 691hp P85D and then delivered 463hp and say "ha, ha, gotcha, we said motors can do 691hp, but the battery will never let it - we never said all of the systems in the car will allow the motors to produce the advertised horsepower, LOL". More recently, have you seen what Tesla lawyers are saying about S&X screens going yellow - "does not affect functionality of the car, therefore not covered under warranty". Anyone wants to bet that the AP2 cars with FSD will never get the free update to drive as unsupervised robo-taxis (Tesla called it ride sharing, car hailing back then)? Tesla will point you to the fine print which gives them till the end of time to deliver of course.

In this case Elon is scrutinizing the word "next owner" to mean only the very next owner, even if that owner only owned it for 60 seconds because they are the consignment dealer facilitating your transfer. If you were to ask people a year ago what it meant to have transferable supercharging, most (if not all) would say it stays with the car forever. If anyone was to try to suggest it only goes to the literal next owner on paper and only one, fanboys would flame them into submission. All along Elon was laughing "Suckers! They think SC stays with the car for the life of the car!"
8489BB42-54B7-41E1-8102-49F4DFF63FBE.gif
 
That's the spirit, only way I would consider dropping the issue is if they agreed to a reasonable financial compensation for what was taken away. That would be the estimated cost of supercharging fees over the expected length of ownership plus something additional to compensate for decreased resale value.
I would get a screenshot of your neighbors Tesla account showing those Supercharging terms prior to completing the transfer of ownership process with Tesla.

Tesla would probably query cars like all 4 of mine and say the average SC value over the lifetime per car is $100. LMAO.
 
When will people learn that you have to read all Tesla fine print with the most negative possible interpretation, and even then you have to save screen captures of the wording because they "clarify" them with further limitations (or sometimes complete change of meaning)? Elon is ruthless when it comes to money, so if he can pull a fast one on people to make a buck, he will. This isn't new, look back how he sold us on a 691hp P85D and then delivered 463hp and say "ha, ha, gotcha, we said motors can do 691hp, but the battery will never let it - we never said all of the systems in the car will allow the motors to produce the advertised horsepower, LOL". More recently, have you seen what Tesla lawyers are saying about S&X screens going yellow - "does not affect functionality of the car, therefore not covered under warranty". Anyone wants to bet that the AP2 cars with FSD will never get the free update to drive as unsupervised robo-taxis (Tesla called it ride sharing, car hailing back then)? Tesla will point you to the fine print which gives them till the end of time to deliver of course.

In this case Elon is scrutinizing the word "next owner" to mean only the very next owner, even if that owner only owned it for 60 seconds because they are the consignment dealer facilitating your transfer. If you were to ask people a year ago what it meant to have transferable supercharging, most (if not all) would say it stays with the car forever. If anyone was to try to suggest it only goes to the literal next owner on paper and only one, fanboys would flame them into submission. All along Elon was laughing "Suckers! They think SC stays with the car for the life of the car!"

It just seems pretty clear that the intent was that FUSC was for the lifetime of the car. It seems that Tesla is legally obligated to honour their commitment. I'm still hoping that this is all just a miscommunication related to the third-party sales.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: erik_k
I've recently purchased a 2016 Model S 90D (pre facelift) and received the following message from Tesla support concerning FUSC for me and future owners:

"The Free Lifetime Supercharging will transfer to the new owner, as long as the transaction is between 3rd parties. No matter how times it is sold, it will transfer. The only time this will be voided, if the car is sold to an Auction, at that point it will no longer transfer."

The transfer to my account is now complete and my account shows that I have FUSC. This is at least one data point showing that private sale cars are unaffected. YMMV.
 
I've recently purchased a 2016 Model S 90D (pre facelift) and received the following message from Tesla support concerning FUSC for me and future owners:

"The Free Lifetime Supercharging will transfer to the new owner, as long as the transaction is between 3rd parties. No matter how times it is sold, it will transfer. The only time this will be voided, if the car is sold to an Auction, at that point it will no longer transfer."

The transfer to my account is now complete and my account shows that I have FUSC. This is at least one data point showing that private sale cars are unaffected. YMMV.

Interesting, I wonder how they justify Auctions as an exception to the terms. The first sentence is certainly correct, any transaction in which Tesla takes ownership of the vehicle allows them to remove anything they want but any 3rd party transfer including auctions gives them zero legal rights to alter the vehicle in any manner that affects its value or cost of ownership. Would you be able to share a screenshot of that communication from Tesla? In my case I'm fairly certain the vehicle history indicated a direct sale or trade-in to the dealership, not an auction. Not that that should matter for the reasons I've mentioned.
 
I've recently purchased a 2016 Model S 90D (pre facelift) and received the following message from Tesla support concerning FUSC for me and future owners:

"The Free Lifetime Supercharging will transfer to the new owner, as long as the transaction is between 3rd parties. No matter how times it is sold, it will transfer. The only time this will be voided, if the car is sold to an Auction, at that point it will no longer transfer."

The transfer to my account is now complete and my account shows that I have FUSC. This is at least one data point showing that private sale cars are unaffected. YMMV.

Thanks for sharing your experience -- this is more in line with my expectations :) I'm glad that it successfully worked for you!

Interesting, I wonder how they justify Auctions as an exception to the terms. The first sentence is certainly correct, any transaction in which Tesla takes ownership of the vehicle allows them to remove anything they want but any 3rd party transfer including auctions gives them zero legal rights to alter the vehicle in any manner that affects its value or cost of ownership. Would you be able to share a screenshot of that communication from Tesla? In my case I'm fairly certain the vehicle history indicated a direct sale or trade-in to the dealership, not an auction. Not that that should matter for the reasons I've mentioned.

I agree -- something seems off about that statement. Perhaps Tesla was referring to vehicles that Tesla purchased as a trade-in but then subsesequntly sold at auction? This would make sense to me -- they would have the right to remove FUSC from the vehicle they own before selling it at auction. Perhaps they meant to write the following:

The only time this will be voided, if the car is sold [by Tesla] to an Auction, at that point it will no longer transfer.

Without knowing the ownership history of a car, it won't be immediately obvious to a purchaser whether or not the car was traded in to Tesla after 2019-07 and it's FUSC removed. I think purchasers will have to rely on the statement about FUSC on the "My Tesla" page.
 
Without knowing the ownership history of a car, it won't be immediately obvious to a purchaser whether or not the car was traded in to Tesla after 2019-07 and it's FUSC removed. I think purchasers will have to rely on the statement about FUSC on the "My Tesla" page.

That was what I was getting at with my question on post #74. I know the '16 should come with it, but is there any way to verify before purchasing?
 
I'm guessing what rsritchey is describing is the situation I'm currently in. But I'll reiterate - I never saw anything written out there saying anything of the sort. Even if I did - there is no way to verify if Tesla bought the car and wholesaled it out unless Telsa tells you - and good luck with getting a response from them prior to being an owner. They have gamed the system essentially to be a gotcha game after the fact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: byeLT4
I agree -- something seems off about that statement. Perhaps Tesla was referring to vehicles that Tesla purchased as a trade-in but then subsesequntly sold at auction? This would make sense to me -- they would have the right to remove FUSC from the vehicle they own before selling it at auction. Perhaps they meant to write the following:

The only time this will be voided, if the car is sold [by Tesla] to an Auction, at that point it will no longer transfer.

Without knowing the ownership history of a car, it won't be immediately obvious to a purchaser whether or not the car was traded in to Tesla after 2019-07 and it's FUSC removed. I think purchasers will have to rely on the statement about FUSC on the "My Tesla" page.

Seems like wishful thinking on your part. I doubt that’s what Tesla meant. Their new policy is to end FUSC on any car Tesla buys whether they sell to a private party or to an auction. I see no reason to call out if they sell at auctions in that case.

My guess is that they’re taking the position that cars sold at auctions are salvaged and they’re treating the auction block as the end of that car’s “life”. Don’t know if this makes any sense at all however lol
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FlatSix911
Seems like wishful thinking on your part. I doubt that’s what Tesla meant. Their new policy is to end FUSC on any car Tesla buys whether they sell to a private party or to an auction. I see no reason to call out if they sell at auctions in that case.

My guess is that they’re taking the position that cars sold at auctions are salvaged and they’re treating the auction block as the end of that car’s “life”. Don’t know if this makes any sense at all however lol

they are basically removing it from any car they can without backlash, they are leaving private owners alone or they will hear a mouth full.
 
  • Like
Reactions: erik_k
they are basically removing it from any car they can without backlash, they are leaving private owners alone or they will hear a mouth full.
Lol, who will hear it? The answering machine you get when you call? Or poor SC employees who are already hearing mouthfuls when they have to explain to people things such as why yellowing screen in their 6 month old car is not covered under warranty (new screen available at $1,300) or why there are no loaners while their cars have to sit on the lot for a few days while waiting to get in to the shop for a couple of hours to actually perform the repair?
 
It just seems pretty clear that the intent was that FUSC was for the lifetime of the car. It seems that Tesla is legally obligated to honour their commitment. I'm still hoping that this is all just a miscommunication related to the third-party sales.
Clearly this is not a miscommunication, Tesla is stripping FUSC from cars they don't own and hoping to get away with it (and they probably will, as with other crap they've been pulling on their customers).
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlatSix911
Seems like wishful thinking on your part. I doubt that’s what Tesla meant. Their new policy is to end FUSC on any car Tesla buys whether they sell to a private party or to an auction. I see no reason to call out if they sell at auctions in that case.

My guess is that they’re taking the position that cars sold at auctions are salvaged and they’re treating the auction block as the end of that car’s “life”. Don’t know if this makes any sense at all however lol

I think that we're thinking the same thing -- I agree with everything you wrote. I was just trying to explain what the Tesla CS rep might have been thinking when they wrote their less-than-complete response to rsritchey. Simply put, if Tesla ever takes possession of a car they'll remove FUSC and either sell it pre-owned without FUSC, or sell it to at a wholesale auction (where it will be purchased by a used-car dealer and subsequently sold without FUSC).

If you currently have a car with FUSC you should retain FUSC, and anyone you sell the car to (whether it's a used-car dealer or a private individual) should retain FUSC.
 
It says transfers to the next owner, not all owners ad infinitum, as it was pointed out to me in another thread. So it's possible that if you bought your FUSC car from a dealer, they would count as the 'next owner' and you get nothing.

I'm not sure how many states are this way but in many states if not most the dealer doesn't ever put the car title in their name, they just hold it and transfer it to the next owner.

Tesla wouldn't have the legal right to pull it just because you paid the use car dealer to hand you the papers to your car.
 
I'm not sure how many states are this way but in many states if not most the dealer doesn't ever put the car title in their name, they just hold it and transfer it to the next owner.

Tesla wouldn't have the legal right to pull it just because you paid the use car dealer to hand you the papers to your car.

Tesla wouldn't have the right to pull FUSC off even if the used-car dealer takes the car title into their own name. If Tesla pulled FUSC away from cars owned by used-car dealers then they would be devaluing the used-car dealer's inventory. The dealer (as well as the previous owners) purchased the car with the FUSC feature built into the price -- Tesla can't take this away without buying back the car.
 
Tesla wouldn't have the right to pull FUSC off even if the used-car dealer takes the car title into their own name. If Tesla pulled FUSC away from cars owned by used-car dealers then they would be devaluing the used-car dealer's inventory. The dealer (as well as the previous owners) purchased the car with the FUSC feature built into the price -- Tesla can't take this away without buying back the car.


I can't stop laughing at all the "devaluing the used- car" price by removing FUSC. Tesla has absolutely no care in how much they devalue used cars. My first 2015 Loaded S85D had a higher list price than my Raven refresh Long Rage Performance + Ludicrous.....and a large less than my 2017 S100D. Tesla doesn't give a rats a$$ about how they devalue cars with any decision they make.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeoX750
I can't stop laughing at all the "devaluing the used- car" price by removing FUSC. Tesla has absolutely no care in how much they devalue used cars. My first 2015 Loaded S85D had a higher list price than my Raven refresh Long Rage Performance + Ludicrous.....and a large less than my 2017 S100D. Tesla doesn't give a rats a$$ about how they devalue cars with any decision they make.

He isn't saying Tesla wouldn't do it because they would be devaluing their cars. He's saying Tesla would not have the right to do it because they'd be intentionally devaluing somebody else's property. Not sure how correct that is, though, I am not a lawyer
 
I can't stop laughing at all the "devaluing the used- car" price by removing FUSC. Tesla has absolutely no care in how much they devalue used cars. My first 2015 Loaded S85D had a higher list price than my Raven refresh Long Rage Performance + Ludicrous.....and a large less than my 2017 S100D. Tesla doesn't give a rats a$$ about how they devalue cars with any decision they make.

Agree, but there is a difference between not caring and having legal standing to do so. Based on all published materials a buyer has the right to expect this feature, by removing it post private sale they have financially impacted the buyer via both cost of ownership and devaluation. I'm sure they have great lawyers but this would be a very tough case for them and I would suspect they were not consulted prior to these actions.
 
I can't stop laughing at all the "devaluing the used- car" price by removing FUSC. Tesla has absolutely no care in how much they devalue used cars. My first 2015 Loaded S85D had a higher list price than my Raven refresh Long Rage Performance + Ludicrous.....and a large less than my 2017 S100D. Tesla doesn't give a rats a$$ about how they devalue cars with any decision they make.

I agree that Tesla likely doesn't care about devaluing cars they own, but that doesn't give them the legal right to do so.

He isn't saying Tesla wouldn't do it because they would be devaluing their cars. He's saying Tesla would not have the right to do it because they'd be intentionally devaluing somebody else's property. Not sure how correct that is, though, I am not a lawyer

Yes, that is what I meant :) Put in another context:

Suppose you buy a car for $50K that includes a 4-year warranty that transfers to future owners. You drive the car for two years and then decide to sell it; however, the manufacturer suddenly changes its policy such that the warranty no longer transfers to future owners. You now have a car that would have no warranty for future owners so its resale value drops accordingly. By taking away a portion of the warranty that you legally purchased with the car the manufacturer benefits (i.e. reduced warranty repairs), and you suffer a financial loss (i.e. reduced resale value). The is not a legal action by the manufacturer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlatSix911