San Diego Man's $58,000 Nightmare with a (Salvage Title) Tesla Model S

[ElSupreme]

That cracks me up, but in a sad way.

So I'll amend my statement:

There are mechanical things that are also near impossible to repair. And things that are designed to be non-repairable.

Apple doesn't sell iPhone screens. If I buy a bricked (firmware issue) iPhone from an auction. Would Apple be required to unbrick it? Would they be required to tell people how to unbrick their phones?

Sure the Model S costs a lot. And software is hard to work around. But it isn't impossible.

This guy bought a broken car. And he can't figure out how to fix it himself. So he is asking Tesla to fix it, and he won't agree to their terms.

I deal with this at work all the time. I am a contractor engineer. I give the client a proposal to fix their problem. The client asks me to a meeting discussing the problem they are having. They try to spitball solutions to the problem, and get me to give it to them for free. When I give them a proposal they tell me I cost to much. Rinse and repeat.


This isn't any different. This guy did something stupid, got in over his head, and wants someone else to bail him out. They offer some terms to help, and he doesn't agree. No sympathy given!

 

[qwk]

Ok. But this thread is about some guy in San Diego that bought a Tesla that wouldn't charge, then expected Tesla to just make it charge again. And it most definately isn't false because as I clearly stated in my post that it is "My understanding ..." not "This is known!".

My point was that Tesla has been known to do the opposite of what you stated. Nobody but Tesla knows the exact details of what happened in this case, so how can you say with 100% certainty what happened?

 

[seanahan]

If you bought an Apple II from auction and it didn't boot would you expect Apple to give you a working boot disk?

Yes, if the Apple II was a currently supported product. If the disks were not free, I would expect Apple to sell them to me at a reasonable price.

I bought my Model S, so I own the battery. If Tesla were to remotely disable my battery for some reason, I would have to file a law suit and complain as loudly as possible until it was re-enabled.

Now, I think the main problem is that he thinks Tesla will be too strict on determining what "road worthy" is, and he will have to put in an extra $10k to make it high quality. This seems reasonable, since Tesla has a brand to protect, and this gentleman does not. Hopefully Tesla can meet him half way, sign the release of liability, and figure out a way to have an independent arbiter determine whether the car is road worthy.

Just a hypothetical: He repairs the car, but doesn't fully fix all the safety features, gets in a tragic accident, and dies. Obviously this would be horrible, but what would the news stories say? "Man dies in Tesla", or "Man dies in Tesla he didn't successfully rebuild to specifications"? I know this is callous, but believe me, publicly traded corporations think about these kinds of things.

 

[palmer_md]

There are many reasons why people purchase a "salvage" car. The two major ones are to resell the parts to others who are rebuilding, and the other is to rebuild the car yourself, to save the cost of using the expensive repair shops (which is why the insurance company did not get it repaired in the first place and is selling it as salvage). Now if we assume that Tesla is not going to allow anyone except a Tesla certified repair shop to do the work on the car, and the cost of repairs in those shops is too expensive to financially pencil out, then none of these cars are ever going to get repaired and they are all just going to head to the recycling yard to collect all the glass, aluminum, copper and other recyclable materials. The value of just the materials is not very much, so that is all the insurance companies are going to expect to be collecting on damaged Tesla's. This will seriously raise the rates for insurance on these cars if the car has no resale value for the parts, and only has resale value for the materials.

This is why Tesla is going to have to eventually release some information to allow third parties to have at least limited access to reset certain functions of the car. If they don't then they completely eliminate any parts value for these cars.

 

[ckessel]

So he is asking Tesla to fix it, and he won't agree to their terms.

You've said this several times and it's flat out false. He's asking Tesla to enable charging.

If I ask the electric company to activate electricity to my house, I'm not asking them to "fix" my wiring.

 

[Gizmotoy]

There are mechanical things that are also near impossible to repair. And things that are designed to be non-repairable.

I mean, if the goal is to keep changing the argument, fine, but that's clearly not what we were talking about.

The iPhone was an interesting analogy to choose. I'd argue the iPhone is a pretty strong counterpoint against you. You can buy every single part of an iPhone and repair what is broken without taking it back to Apple. Apple doesn't sell their parts directly to consumers, they leave this to third parties. You can go to an independent shop that specializes in iPhone repairs. You can go to Apple authorized repair centers. Through the Genius Bar, you can even go to Apple itself.

If you drop the phone and break the screen, they don't prevent the phone from charging again until they've had a chance to look it over. If you drop the phone in water they may void the warranty, but they will still replace the battery for you. Apple doesn't shut down your phone if you decide to replace the battery with some trashy $0.25 unit from China.

And this is how Apple, a company that tightly controls their product lines, operates. Not even they take things as far as Tesla has here.

 

[brianman]

If one wants to have a $100k BBQ, that is none of Tesla's business, as they no longer OWN the car.

This phrase needs a picture behind it.

 

[ckessel]

At a minimum, it should be known at salvage auction if the battery is enabled or not. There will be, if there haven't already been, cases where the battery is absolutely fine and the salvage damage left it completely intact. The article isn't clear what the battery "damage" is in this case.

Totaled, but not crippled, will get more and more common as Tesla's get older and lose value, plus the fact that as an all aluminum luxury car they are crazy expensive to get repaired anyway.

 

[yobigd20]

in an accident, duesn't the main battery fuse blow as a safety precaution? is the issue here that he just needs the fuse replaced? I wonder if he swapped it with a good battery pack from a working Tesla if that would just work out of the box since the fuse is embedded inside the battery pack.

 

[qwk]

in an accident, duesn't the main battery fuse blow as a safety precaution? is the issue here that he just needs the fuse replaced? I wonder if he swapped it with a good battery pack from a working Tesla if that would just work out of the box since the fuse is embedded inside the battery pack.

I don't know if the fuse blows in every case, but if it does, it is very easy to replace.

 

[ckessel]

in an accident, duesn't the main battery fuse blow as a safety precaution?

I think that's part of the unknown and why I thought it should probably be a requirement to state if the battery is usable at any auction (hell, any sale period).

A bunch of us have had accidents and the battery doesn't shut off in a fender bender. Which is a good thing, but it be in everyone's best interest to know specifically when the main battery gets shut down and requires Tesla intervention to activate.

 

[ElSupreme]

He's asking Tesla to enable charging.

So it is broken. If it isn't broken then why would Tesla need to do anything.

What difference does it make if the break is software or hardware. It's still broke and needs fixen.

He is asking Tesla to do something, which they have no obligation to do. He bought it in a non-functional condition.

 

[ckessel]

So it is broken. If it isn't broken then why would Tesla need to do anything.

Is my lamp broken when the electricity is off?

Is your car broken when you're not sitting in it to turn it on?

He bought it in a non-functional condition.

No, he bought it in salvage condition. That's not the same. That's been stated repeatedly, which you seem to be intentionally ignoring because it doesn't fit your viewpoint.

 

[ElSupreme]

No, he bought it in salvage condition. That's not the same. That's been stated repeatedly, which you seem to be intentionally ignoring because it doesn't fit your viewpoint.

So he bought a car that would properly charge? No it wouldn't. Tesla has no contract with the guy. So how are they obligated to help him in any way?

Sure we all want Tesla to do this. But really they have no obligation too. It's not like this was some sort of scam. A salvage auction is an 'as-is' auction. And many times full damage is not disclosed or known. And it in no means implies the car can be repaired to functioning. Just that it can be tagged/titled if repaired under the same VIN. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvage_title

I am not fitting anything to my viewpoint. Salvage auctions imply there are major costs to repair, and also convey that the full damage was not assessed. Just enough damage was assessed to determine the car totaled. All they mean is IF you can repair the car you can get a title/tag with the original VIN.

Your idea of a salvage car isn't in line with reality. They are gambles. And people without the expertise to repair the car themselves are at the mercy of others. Tesla has an iron grip on repair, and as an owner it is scary. It isn't a secret. And they even offered to help the guy. But he refused. Life is tough when you make bad decisions with $50k.

- - - Updated - - -

Is my lamp broken when the electricity is off?

No but the electricity is broken. And if you want it back on you are going to have to agree to the power companies terms. Which may involve having a approved electrician do some needed repairs before they flip the switch.

 

[ckessel]

So he bought a car that would properly charge?

Should he have expected that parts of the car that might look absolutely fine at auction have been disabled by the manufacturer? Could he have even known that? Hell, I'm an owner and I had zero idea Tesla remotely disables batteries based on...well...we have no idea how they decide it.

No but the electricity is broken. And if you want it back on you are going to have to agree to the power companies terms. Which may involve having a approved electrician do some needed repairs before they flip the switch.

You're contention is I should call the electric company every time I want to turn on my lamp rather than being able to turn the switch myself?

After all, a lamp is a dangerous thing. The bulb could explode. Perhaps you believe the electric company should come out an inspect my lamp before each use?

 

[omarsultan]

You've said this several times and it's flat out false. He's asking Tesla to enable charging.

If I ask the electric company to activate electricity to my house, I'm not asking them to "fix" my wiring.

Great example. The electric company will not turn on electricity to your house until it has been inspected by the local building inspector. I don't see the difference between the two examples. The buyer is asking Tesla to take his word for it that things are fixed in working properly, which is nuts. If things go south, the media will report another Tesla fire and the attorneys will go after Tesla for not doing its due dilligence.

 

[CliffG]

There are mechanical things that are also near impossible to repair. And things that are designed to be non-repairable.

Apple doesn't sell iPhone screens. If I buy a bricked (firmware issue) iPhone from an auction. Would Apple be required to unbrick it? Would they be required to tell people how to unbrick their phones?

Sure the Model S costs a lot. And software is hard to work around. But it isn't impossible.

This guy bought a broken car. And he can't figure out how to fix it himself. So he is asking Tesla to fix it, and he won't agree to their terms.

I deal with this at work all the time. I am a contractor engineer. I give the client a proposal to fix their problem. The client asks me to a meeting discussing the problem they are having. They try to spitball solutions to the problem, and get me to give it to them for free. When I give them a proposal they tell me I cost to much. Rinse and repeat.


This isn't any different. This guy did something stupid, got in over his head, and wants someone else to bail him out. They offer some terms to help, and he doesn't agree. No sympathy given!

this. +1

repairing/modifying an old-style (ICE) vehicle is qualitatively different from doing so with a heavy, powerful computer with wheels and seats. I'd guess (completely without evidence or proof) that Tesla would be more amenable to work done by someone who could prove they knew enough to do the work. Oh, wait. They do. This person doesn't appear to be willing to do so. Maybe we'll learn more as time goes by.

This is probably going to be the model for such requests for Model X vehicles as well, but - again only a gut feeling - I would guess Tesla will need a different approach for the Model3 if only because it's supposed to be a more mass-produced commodity.

 

[Pantoot]

Great example. The electric company will not turn on electricity to your house until it has been inspected by the local building inspector. I don't see the difference between the two examples. The buyer is asking Tesla to take his word for it that things are fixed in working properly, which is nuts. If things go south, the media will report another Tesla fire and the attorneys will go after Tesla for not doing its due dilligence.

Imagine how upset you would be if the inspector deemed your house unworthy of electricity and confiscated and destroyed it.

 

[ckessel]

Can anyone think of any other manufactured good (car, tv, whatever) where, if bought used or even damaged, it requires the manufacturer's consent to use?

Is Tesla completely unique in this?

I buy a used TV, I plug it in, I can use it.
I buy a used 12V battery, I attach it, I can use it.
etc

 

[Cal1]

Of course you're right but many here seem to assume Sony would somehow be hurt if your used big screen malfunctions. Perhaps Sony should required an inspection to verify that said tv is working properly incase it should A. blow up, B. not work properly, C. cause your eyes to explode. Sony could then just not sell parts incase things don't function per their ideal performance standards.