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

Out of warranty concerns about Tesla

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
An NDA is definitely a red flag. Whatever they did to Islandbay's car they don't want being discussed and getting out to the general public. I would never sign anything if that sort. This is very unusual. Speculating that maybe they swapped his battery pack for a larger one and this will be available to all at swap stations in the future hence the need to NDA it so Islandbay can't speak about impending Tesla announcements??
Nothing sinister is taking place here. And I could only wish they swapped my pack for a 85! Warranty work was done as it should be. As usual, they go above and beyond what is required of them.

- - - Updated - - -

Or they don't want the true root cause of the "clunk" out in the open...
Has nothing to do with that.

- - - Updated - - -

:confused: Curiouser and curiouser...

I wonder how that one played out - "Mr Islandbayy, before we make good on our legal obligations to you under your car's warranty, would you mind signing this pesky little NDA? Just a formality, mind you."
Nothing to do with warranty work. As stated, nothing sinister had happened here. Some things just need to remain private.
 
I think Tesla gave Islandbayy something for his pain and trouble, and that is what's behind the NDA.

Shortly after I took delivery of my car in 2013, I had some service issues that were sent up the corporate ladder. Ultimately Tesla made me very satisfied, but it also involved an aspect of my service that I was asked not to discuss publicly. I didn't have to sign an NDA, but if my situation had occurred today I probably would have.

Regardless, Tesla is awesome!
 
Last edited:
+1 @amped! Similar to my situation I didn't have to sign an NDA recently but was asked to keep it to myself and not discuss publically on the boards. (And nothing sinister went down on my car either)

like @islandbayy mentioned earlier if we all have a true reason above and beyond just being irritated with the fact that "many" cars are about to go out of warranty and how is tesla going to handle this etc. if you have a car that's truly had a lot of repairs or needs repairs and the service center isn't fixng the issue (not the case here) then speak up to regional manager (your SC manager is liable to give this to you) or email Jerome that's what he's here for.

while yes I'd love to hear what tesla did to fix his car the ony true thing that matters is that they did so he and his family can continue to say they drive the safest car in the world which he clearly couldn't say before.
 
It's simple. A cash payment to keep quiet on the boards.

Well if it was that, then he's failed on the 'keeping it quiet' part. :)

Why does everyone assume the worst here? Are we all really that cynical? Tesla has repeatedly shown they'll do the right thing, they did it again here, and immediately because of a few words (no matter what the OP says as follow up) people are coming up with very negative responses. Boggles the mind.
 
Certain states (eg: Florida) are ineligible for the extended warranty due to Tesla being unwilling to comply with state law. Every other car company has no problem selling warranties that comply with state law here.
Whoa. Not quite correct. No automobile manufacturer, in fact, no manufacturer of anything, is allowed to sell an extended warranty in Florida. Tesla Motors is complying with state law, just as are all the traditional automobile manufacturers, by not selling extended warranties direct to consumers in that state.

Other manufacturers use 'independent franchised dealerships' to sell their cars. Because they are separate entities from the manufacturer, they can also act as independent insurance agents. The insurance lobby in Florida made sure that state law considered an extended warranty as a form of insurance. Further, Tesla Motors isn't allowed to get a license to become an insurance carrier, also because they are a manufacturer. So only independent representatives of insurance carriers can offer warranties for purchase. This is another industry that protects itself from competition by limiting access and stacking the deck in its own favor.

Strangely, no one seems to feel it is a conflict of interest for an 'independent franchised dealership' to be a representative: 1) of the automobile manufacturer; 2) of the finance company; and 3) the insurance company. Not to mention also brokering the sale of your trade-in vehicle and handling taxes, fees, and documentation for the state.

Tesla Motors can offer an included warranty of any length, and with any terms they like... But they cannot sell an extended warranty of any sort where prohibited.
 
Why does everyone assume the worst here? Are we all really that cynical? Tesla has repeatedly shown they'll do the right thing, they did it again here, and immediately because of a few words (no matter what the OP says as follow up) people are coming up with very negative responses. Boggles the mind.
I was debating further response, vs letting the topic die.

I'll take some (ok, most) of the blame for stirring the pot re: the NDA, if only because I made the first post. Going back and re-reading islandbayy's post that I replied to, there's nothing that said getting the work done was contingent on signing the NDA, or even that the 2 were connected. So, mae culpa for inferring a connection that probably wasn't there. I'll (hopefully) avoid any further speculation here or pot-stirring.

It may be something as innocuous as "look, we did a whole bunch of extraneous work on your car to make sure everything is OK, please don't tell anyone the details, since we'd rather not go through that again". Maybe, as others have speculated, Tesla "gave him something", in which case they don't want word to get out on the specifics of what they are will to "give" to make customers happy. It seems reasonable to me that they would want to keep both of these under wraps.

Haha, that's probably the worst thing you could have said. Not in a bad way, but now I'm trying to figure out what's going on. Does the NDA cover anything of a technical nature?
Actually, after thinking more about it, and reading subsequent posts, I think it's a good thing, and bodes well for current/future customers. The indication (to me) is that Tesla will go above and beyond to do the right thing and make sure their customers are completely, 100%, absolutely satisfied. I don't fault them if they want the details of that kept under wraps.
 
The indication (to me) is that Tesla will go above and beyond to do the right thing and make sure their customers are completely, 100%, absolutely satisfied. I don't fault them if they want the details of that kept under wraps.

Well. I don't know if I'd go that far. I had several interactions with my previous SvC in which I was far from 100%, absolutely satisfied.
 
Valet

4) Yes, the trouble is that everyone seems to get valet service. Not just those of us who pay for service. Elon is on record acknowledging that $600 is an unreasonable amount to charge for "no service."

I have never had it. I almost forgot about the existence of valet service because it has never been offered to me when I make a service appointment (I'm very close to the SC). I remember how cool I thought the idea of them bringing and returning the car was, and then it never happened. How do you get valet, do you just have to specifically ask for it?
 
[I bought the service plan, if it matters]. The first time I got valet service (maybe 18 months ago?), I asked for it. Since then they have always offered it, or at least said it was available if I needed it.

Of course it was not offered with the Roadster, and I don't think I got it the first time I took the Model S in. But I have taken advantage of it every time since. It really is convenient!

They have an employee that lives near me, so he picks up my car on his way to work (he will have taken a loaner home the night before), and drops my car off on his way home. That way they don't have to make any special trips, but I always have a car and I never have to drive in.
 
T
Do I have any options here? This feels like I'm being forced to purchase service from Tesla when I really don't need to. Something about that stinks of unfair practices.

You're being forced to purchase service from Tesla because Tesla is keeping its specs secret. Only solutions are:
(a) get together with some other owners and tear down a car to reverse-engineer everything
(b) get together with the Right to Repair Coalition and get a law passed requiring that Tesla release the maintenance specs. (The Massachusetts law actually exempts Tesla due to the way it's written, and needs to be amended.)
(c) convince Elon that the sharp business practices of Tesla are not cool and are bad for Tesla's reputation (which they are).

- - - Updated - - -

Well if it was that, then he's failed on the 'keeping it quiet' part. :)

Why does everyone assume the worst here? Are we all really that cynical? Tesla has repeatedly shown they'll do the right thing,
Tesla has also repeatedly shown that they'll do the wrong thing. They're cheating the copyright holders of the Linux kernel, at least. Their response to being called on it was, according to thirdhand information, to hire a law firm which specializes in filing dilatory motions to delay suits.

Tesla's legal department *stinks*. Other divisions of Tesla -- pretty darn good. The legal department -- well, if I were Elon, I'd replace it immediately, they've done an awful job at practically everything they've had to deal with -- you can probably come up with other examples off the top of your head. I'm not a lawyer and I could have done better, which is embarassing.
 
Tesla has also repeatedly shown that they'll do the wrong thing. They're cheating the copyright holders of the Linux kernel, at least. Their response to being called on it was, according to thirdhand information, to hire a law firm which specializes in filing dilatory motions to delay suits.

Tesla's legal department *stinks*. Other divisions of Tesla -- pretty darn good. The legal department -- well, if I were Elon, I'd replace it immediately, they've done an awful job at practically everything they've had to deal with -- you can probably come up with other examples off the top of your head. I'm not a lawyer and I could have done better, which is embarassing.

Someone who was conversant with legal requirements would not be posting thirdhand information as fact. For all the posts you've made over the last year+ about legal infringements, even looking for people at one point to file suit, nothing has happened. Seems they may not be so incompetent after all. :)
 
Where's the evidence of this? The mere usage of Linux in a product does not constitute infringement.

Do they have an offer to provide the source code buried someplace in the manual on the car (don't have a car right now to look)? I'm not seeing anything on the website or in MyTesla (but I could just not be finding it). If this offer or a download of the source doesn't exist then they are infringing on the copyright.
 
Do they have an offer to provide the source code buried someplace in the manual on the car (don't have a car right now to look)? I'm not seeing anything on the website or in MyTesla (but I could just not be finding it). If this offer or a download of the source doesn't exist then they are infringing on the copyright.

You may be right. I can't find anything. It's rather simple for them to comply with the license if they didn't make modifications. (A couple of sentences in the manual would do it.) And it's entirely possibly that they made no modifications to Linux.
 
Tesla has also repeatedly shown that they'll do the wrong thing. They're cheating the copyright holders of the Linux kernel, at least.

Please educate yourself on this issue before you keep posting this nonsense wherever you can on this site. Linux is covered by what is known as the GNU General Public License, or GPL. The GPL was developed for the GNU project by the Free Software Foundation. One of the great strengths of open-source programming is the reliance on reuse of software. If the reused software is proprietary, this creates a grave problem when it comes to copyright enforcement.

Just because you claim copyright breach doesn't mean there has been one. No one is taking issue with Telsa for a very good reason: It has done nothing wrong!

I'm not a lawyer...

Yes, we can tell.
 
Last edited: