Should Tesla do something about my degradation?

[glide]

This thread is going nowhere and people are just attacking each other. We should all just leave it as it is.

No. People who worship at the altar of Elon are attacking those with legitimate gripes.

Op potentially has legal avenues to explore depending how/why the “degradation” is as bad as it is.

 

[Evbwcaer]

Wk057 might be able to upgrade your car to an 85 for less than Tesla’s 12.5k for a 60. Maybe explore that route.

 

[rxlawdude]

I don't worship at the alter of Elon. But I also consider that plaintiffs in lawsuits against Tesla are spreading distrust for ulterior motives.

 

[glide]

I don't worship at the alter of Elon. But I also consider that plaintiffs in lawsuits against Tesla are spreading distrust for ulterior motives.

Well you would be wrong. I am party to the lawsuit because that is how class action lawsuits work.

I own a product they sold that has an issue.

Not everyone is a “short”. Geez.

 

[rxlawdude]

Well you would be wrong. I am party to the lawsuit because that is how class action lawsuits work.

I own a product they sold that has an issue.

Not everyone is a “short”. Geez.

Didn't say you're a short. Did say as a plaintiff suing Tesla, you hold an adversarial position and potentially a financial incentive to bash.

 

[rxlawdude]

Helping others understand their options for when a company steals from them?

That's a bold statement.

 

[glide]

That's a bold statement.

It’s a factual statement. Not sure what else to call it. In my case, I bought a Performance vehicle and range/power were artificially taken from me by Tesla so they could avoid doing a recall.

What would you call that?

 

[glide]

Didn't say you're a short. Did say as a plaintiff suing Tesla, you hold an adversarial position and potentially a financial incentive to bash.

And why do you suppose they are being sued? It’s not for no reason. See my post above.

 

[faughtz]

That's a bold statement.

It’s theft in my view, in CA. CA penal code:


502 c 1

(c) Except as provided in subdivision (h), any person who commits any of the following acts is guilty of a public offense:

(1) Knowingly accesses and without permission alters, damages, deletes, destroys, or otherwise uses any data, computer, computer system, or computer network in order to either (A) devise or execute any scheme or artifice to defraud, deceive, or extort, or (B) wrongfully control or obtain money, property, or data.

 

[rxlawdude]

It’s theft in my view, in CA. CA penal code:


502 c 1

(c) Except as provided in subdivision (h), any person who commits any of the following acts is guilty of a public offense:

(1) Knowingly accesses and without permission alters, damages, deletes, destroys, or otherwise uses any data, computer, computer system, or computer network in order to either (A) devise or execute any scheme or artifice to defraud, deceive, or extort, or (B) wrongfully control or obtain money, property, or data.

Um, quoting a criminal statute for a civil class action lawsuit. Brilliant. You might want to read your T&C with respect to "without permission."

If you're going to cite penal code, proper legal relief would be had by submitting a complaint to your police department or the California Attorney General. Rots of Ruck.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

I own a 2013 Models S 60 (EPA rated range 208) purchased in September of 2018. After taking delivery I charged to 100% and the rated range was 177 miles. I brought this to Tesla's attention immediately and the response was "it's normal". Now, a year and a half later it gets 160 rated miles to a 100% charge. This is slightly over 100 real world miles on the highway at 70 mph.

Of course I brought this to the attention of my local SC, who's manger said "sorry, we don't warranty degradation on 2013 vehicles". I then asked them to work with me on a pack replacement and offered $5k out of my pocket towards the swap. I was told "No, we don't do that. You'll have to pay full retail price which is $12,500 plus freight and labor."

I then asked if the could work with me to help trade me out of it and get me into another car. You know, maybe offer a bit more than market value to get an unhappy customer out of their car that is obviously heavily degraded. I was told no, go to the website for your trade value. That number was $18k, which is HALF of what I paid Tesla for the car 18 months ago.

I am livid with Tesla and their incompetent, incapable, uncaring customer service. Should I be? Am I wrong on this?

Before you accepted the vehicle, why did you not ask Tesla to charge it to 100% so you can verify the displayed range? Seems like a very basic thing to do with a BEV, knowing that batteries degrade. You didn't seriously expect to hit EPA rated range on a 5 year old battery, did you?

 

[Electric700]

It’s a factual statement. Not sure what else to call it. In my case, I bought a Performance vehicle and range/power were artificially taken from me by Tesla so they could avoid doing a recall.

What would you call that?

To my knowledge, this was done for safety reasons and based on experience with the cars already out there. Perhaps they can restore some of the range at a later point. I appreciate that they are taking extra precautions. On a related note, the car has a 5 / 5 government safety rating, so they do definitely care about this aspect.

 

[sorka]

I own a 2013 Models S 60 (EPA rated range 208) purchased in September of 2018. After taking delivery I charged to 100% and the rated range was 177 miles.

Dumb question but why didn't you ask why the rated range so low before paying for the car?????

 

[glide]

To my knowledge, this was done for safety reasons and based on experience with the cars already out there. Perhaps they can restore some of the range at a later point. I appreciate that they are taking extra precautions. On a related note, the car has a 5 / 5 government safety rating, so they do definitely care about this aspect.

No. They care about safety when it can be used to sell cars.

When it comes to post-sale safety where a recall is in order, then they will try every trick in the book to avoid it because it costs them money.

Artificially limiting the battery via software to avoid a known safety issue, and then lying about it, is criminal. That’s why they are being sued.

 

[thesnooch]

Um, quoting a criminal statute for a civil class action lawsuit. Brilliant. You might want to read your T&C with respect to "without permission."

If you're going to cite penal code, proper legal relief would be had by submitting a complaint to your police department or the California Attorney General. Rots of Ruck.

What kind of law professor are you lol? You teach at Cooley bro? Or graduated from there? Lolz.

I found your comment really funny actually, like.. Rots of Ruck? wut? lol especially when you're an azn dude yourself hahaha wtf?

Anyways, while citing the penal code is one way to obtain "proper legal relief" as you mentioned, we all know that the CA AG and Local PD aren't gonna do *sugar* when it it comes to providing that relief. Luckily, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030) ("CFAA") imposes criminal and civil liability for unauthorized access or damage to a protected computer. And while the terms and condition with respect to "without permission" may be nestled somewhere in the warranty booklet or sales agreement, the CFAA includes the express prohibition on unauthorized acess or access that exceeds the permission of owners.

So... ching chong ling long ting tong!

 

[rxlawdude]

What kind of law professor are you lol? You teach at Cooley bro? Or graduated from there? Lolz.

I found your comment really funny actually, like.. Rots of Ruck? wut? lol especially when you're an azn dude yourself hahaha wtf?

Anyways, while citing the penal code is one way to obtain "proper legal relief" as you mentioned, we all know that the CA AG and Local PD aren't gonna do *sugar* when it it comes to providing that relief. Luckily, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030) ("CFAA") imposes criminal and civil liability for unauthorized access or damage to a protected computer. And while the terms and condition with respect to "without permission" may be nestled somewhere in the warranty booklet or sales agreement, the CFAA includes the express prohibition on unauthorized acess or access that exceeds the permission of owners.

So... ching chong ling long ting tong!

Let me say it one more time: the person I was responding to quoted a criminal statute. A class action suit is civil.

And again, please read the Terms and Conditions of the computer software you purchased with your car. I'm not disagreeing that what Tesla did is scuzzy, just pointing out that the armchair lawyers here should find a day job.

As to the "rots of ruck" comment, no insult to any race was intended. I sincerely apologize if I offended anyone.

 

[ACA Man]

Wk057 might be able to upgrade your car to an 85

Dumb question but why didn't you ask why the rated range so low before paying for the car?????

i don’t think any Tesla first buyer would know to ask this question.
Plus, they just wanted you to sign the paperwork, take possession of the car, and leave.

In our case, they wanted us to sign the papers then they’d give the keys to be on our way.
We told them we wanted to see the car first.
Reluctantly, they had to abide by our wish and it’s a better thing we insisted since the car was full of blemishes.
After checking the car thoroughly, we told them we’d not take the car unless they fixed all of those problem areas.
This’s a CPO which was supposed to go through their 270 inspection points which is really not true.

Concerning the rated range, I don’t believe any 1st buyer would know and think of asking them to charge to 100% right then and there.
They rushed you through the whole process (it took about 30-45min for us) so asking them to spend another 45-60min with you is not possible.
We can barely made it home once got the car and it’s only about 45 miles away (Buena Park to Ontario).
That was the first time I tried to charge it to see what the rated range was and we’re in for a big surprise.
It was 166 at 100% and it’s now 154.

Basically, OP’s situation is about the same as ours.

 

[glide]

i don’t think any Tesla first buyer would know to ask this question.
Plus, they just wanted you to sign the paperwork, take possession of the car, and leave.

In our case, they wanted us to sign the papers then they’d give the keys to be on our way.
We told them we wanted to see the car first.
Reluctantly, they had to abide by our wish and it’s a better thing we insisted since the car was full of blemishes.
After checking the car thoroughly, we told them we’d not take the car unless they fixed all of those problem areas.
This’s a CPO which was supposed to go through their 270 inspection points which is really not true.

Concerning the rated range, I don’t believe any 1st buyer would know and think of asking them to charge to 100% right then and there.
They rushed you through the whole process (it took about 30-45min for us) so asking them to spend another 45-60min with you is not possible.
We can barely made it home once got the car and it’s only about 45 miles away (Buena Park to Ontario).
That was the first time I tried to charge it to see what the rated range was and we’re in for a big surprise.
It was 166 at 100% and it’s now 154.

Basically, OP’s situation is about the same as ours.

For you and OP,
Make sure you send in the paperwork to opt out of Tesla’s arbitration clause immediately if you are within the window and haven’t already.

That’s the best advice I can give a new Tesla owner.

 

[ACA Man]

For you and OP,
Make sure you send in the paperwork to opt out of Tesla’s arbitration clause immediately if you are within the window and haven’t already.

That’s the best advice I can give a new Tesla owner.

Too late for me and it might already be so for OP.

It’s been more than 2 years for us.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Concerning the rated range, I don’t believe any 1st buyer would know and think of asking them to charge to 100% right then and there.
They rushed you through the whole process (it took about 30-45min for us) so asking them to spend another 45-60min with you is not possible.
We can barely made it home once got the car and it’s only about 45 miles away (Buena Park to Ontario).
That was the first time I tried to charge it to see what the rated range was and we’re in for a big surprise.
It was 166 at 100% and it’s now 154.

Basically, OP’s situation is about the same as ours.

Your and OP's situation are perfect examples of why every Model S/X/Y customer—even for brand new vehicles—should insist on seeing the displayed range at 100%. Even brand new Tesla vehicles are not displaying the advertised EPA range estimates at 100% SOC. Tesla is getting away with murder here. I simply cannot fathom how anyone buys a Tesla without first checking to make sure the battery—arguably the highest priced component of the car—is actually performing as advertised.

I urge every Tesla customer to insist on seeing the displayed range at 100% or decline delivery. Tesla will try to tell you that it's "dependent on driving habits", which is a total lie and you can catch them in the lie. After they say it, point them to their own FAQs on the topic:

Range Tips

"Displayed range is based on regulating agency certification (EPA) and is not adapted based on driving pattern."