Sigh, smash and grab

[Akikiki]

All new Teslas should come with an interior motion detection sensor as part of the security system. (like they offer as an add on for S / X )
When the alarm goes off it sends a text to the owner.
The 8 cameras on the outside need to be motion detection and capture video when parked.
Might need an internal SSD to be really useful and keep enough data.
Getting a picture of the thief or his license number would be helpful for prosecution.
Seems like some of these parking lots or near by businesses where these break ins are happening should have cameras.

Does not matter if they collect capture pictures, videos or even the thieves themselves. CA is not prosecuting them.

 

[Akikiki]

That's easy, treat it like a recall and send the owners a notice of repair.

Really? Its not a safety issue. And if TMC threads are any indication of what's going on across the country, nearly all these incidents are only happening in CA.

 

[whitex]

Again my point is not that an interior alarm (with mobile notifications) will stop the epidemic. My point is it would make a difference larger than zero especially were it a standard feature in most Teslas and thus this would be known to the perps.

Bingo, standard feature AND known to perps. Unless you offer a free retrofit for alarm and locked back seat for all Teslas, it will not be standard as far as perps are concerned. In order for perps to know that for example the rear seat will be locked, they need to break into a bunch of those cars to learn it (they don't read TMC ). The problem will be, once they learn the seats don't go down, they'll learn to smash the read hatch window and get in through the shelf. So now you'll need to add a lockable and hardened rear shelf. Back to the problem of perps knowing - even if 50% of cars are locked and secured, thieves will still keep on trying if their experience tells them 50% of the time there is no lock or the owner just didn't lock it.

Bottom line is, for the thief it's always a risk vs. reward calculation, even if they do it intuitively rather than mathematically. The higher the risk:reward ratio, the less likely for the crime to happen. If you lower the risk by decriminalizing the activity, you'll need to lower the reward by the same amount. Lockable/secured storage reduces the reward, but if it's only on some cars and only some owners use it (lock it) then the reward reduction is only partial. An alarm doesn't decrease the reward, it increases the risk but only ever so slightly if the consequences of getting caught are small. So say 10% higher chance of getting caught and having to pay $100 fine, so if you change of getting caught was 10% to start, the alarm adds a $1 expected cost per break-in (10% original chance of getting caught x 10% due to alarm x $100 fine).

 

[SMAlset]

@hqubic , wow that's not the kind of shopping center like many of the car break ins I've read about (and including ours). Looks tucked into a residential area.

How did your glass situation get resolved?

 

[TripleTrucker]

Wow. I guess all we have to do to avoid car smash and grabs is to move to a state other than California because that crime doesn't occur in the other 49 states? PLEASE don't waste our time with such false beliefs.

I think he's just saying if there are no consequences, there is no deterrent.

 

[ucmndd]

I think he's just saying if there are no consequences, there is no deterrent.

It’s a relatively low risk crime basically everywhere. You have to catch somebody before you can impose consequences. No police agency in the country is staffed to the level of being able to chase down every petty thief caught on a dash cam. There are 40 million people in California.

This is obviously an organized effort, and I think the Bay Area presents a natural opportunity not because of a permissive attitude toward crime, but simply the sheer availability of easy to move expensive stuff. It’s pervasive because it works. The streets are littered with tech workers that think stuffing their Timbuk2 with $3k of tech bro necessities in the trunk is somehow secure and outfoxing the thieves.

Again, I truly believe the only thing that will make this go away is for people to stop leaving valuables in their cars. Not holding my breath on that one.

 

[themapdoctor]

Went out for dinner a relatively well-lit, busy plaza in Cupertino, CA (Blaney & Bollinger), we were there for dinner for about an hour, came out and noticed my car's rear window looked funny, smaller one looked to have some kind of window decal that resembles a broken window, oh wait, it really was broken! The big one was all gone/smashed. Rear seats folded down and the thieve grabbed my work backpack in trunk.

Police came and filed report, a good samaritan came and said he saw the whole thing went down (dude broke window, jumped in, and a few seconds later jumped out and got into a car and left) and even took a picture, unfortunately the picture was blurry but hopefully it helps the police.

For anyone who has repaired smashed windows, is it better to get a third-party to repair or get a Tesla SC to repair it?

BTW just ordered the enhanced anti-theft kit, was out of stock a couple of weeks back when I last checked, oh well.

My Model 3 rear passenger window spontaneously shattered about a month ago. I took it to the Tesla service center. They charged me $215 for the replacement window and installation. They gave me an Enterprise rental car, but had the new window installed in 4 hours. Evidently, third party services have to buy the window from Tesla, as there are no substitutes on the market yet. My insurance reimbursed me the whole amount, no questions asked. I would go directly to Tesla. It seemed like a good price, with excellent service. BUT... I still wonder WHY that window shattered?

 

[rooter]

"Funny"?! Should happen to you, nasty smartypnz.

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the obvious. The rear storage panel is to hide what you have in the back. Remove it and stuff what you have in the lower compartment or the frunk. I know the frunk can be opened but that's not happening yet.

 

[whitex]

It’s a relatively low risk crime basically everywhere. You have to catch somebody before you can impose consequences. No police agency in the country is staffed to the level of being able to chase down every petty thief caught on a dash cam. There are 40 million people in California.

This is obviously an organized effort, and I think the Bay Area presents a natural opportunity not because of a permissive attitude toward crime, but simply the sheer availability of easy to move expensive stuff. It’s pervasive because it works. The streets are littered with tech workers that think stuffing their Timbuk2 with $3k of tech bro necessities in the trunk is somehow secure and outfoxing the thieves.

Again, I truly believe the only thing that will make this go away is for people to stop leaving valuables in their cars. Not holding my breath on that one.

So what you are saying is that the correlation between decriminalizing such crimes and the observed rise of said crimes is pure coincidence?

 

[steve841]

So what you are saying is that the correlation between decriminalizing such crimes and the observed rise of said crimes is pure coincidence?

Dude .. you'll never convince a certain crowd here who prefer to live in a dream world.

 

[ucmndd]

So what you are saying is that the correlation between decriminalizing such crimes and the observed rise of said crimes is pure coincidence?

I’m saying there are many factors and simplification for the sake of a one-note political narrative is in nobody’s best interest.

Correlation != Causation

How many auto burglary crimes were prosecuted in the Bay Area before they were “decriminalized” (which in itself is a rather biased interpretation of what actually happened), and before this current epidemic started? A pittance.

As I said in another reply on one of these threads, if locking people up worked, we’d be the safest county on the planet. Yet somehow we’re not, by a longshot. Probably time to get together and think through some solutions that rise above the preschool level of “do something bad, go to timeout”.

 

[electronblue]

Bingo, standard feature AND known to perps. Unless you offer a free retrofit for alarm and locked back seat for all Teslas, it will not be standard as far as perps are concerned. In order for perps to know that for example the rear seat will be locked, they need to break into a bunch of those cars to learn it (they don't read TMC ). The problem will be, once they learn the seats don't go down, they'll learn to smash the read hatch window and get in through the shelf. So now you'll need to add a lockable and hardened rear shelf. Back to the problem of perps knowing - even if 50% of cars are locked and secured, thieves will still keep on trying if their experience tells them 50% of the time there is no lock or the owner just didn't lock it.

Bottom line is, for the thief it's always a risk vs. reward calculation, even if they do it intuitively rather than mathematically. The higher the risk:reward ratio, the less likely for the crime to happen. If you lower the risk by decriminalizing the activity, you'll need to lower the reward by the same amount. Lockable/secured storage reduces the reward, but if it's only on some cars and only some owners use it (lock it) then the reward reduction is only partial. An alarm doesn't decrease the reward, it increases the risk but only ever so slightly if the consequences of getting caught are small. So say 10% higher chance of getting caught and having to pay $100 fine, so if you change of getting caught was 10% to start, the alarm adds a $1 expected cost per break-in (10% original chance of getting caught x 10% due to alarm x $100 fine).

It does not seem unlikely that lack of interior alarm (with mobile alerts) and lack of lockable rear seatbacks in Teslas has been making them a more lucrative target. Together with that suitably sized window it has been the perfect storm. Put in laminated double glazing, locked seatbacks and interior alarm like some other manufacturers do and it might not be so lucrative. It all adds up. Tesla has standard interior alarm (with mobile alerts) in some markets like Europe so it may be a little less inviting there. For some reason Tesla did not make it standard in the U.S. nor even optional from factory.

There are stories of entire parking lots of Tesla’s being broken into while leaving other cars intact. They are high-end targets with minimal protection so far. That would probably be at least a somewhat different story if each one of those Teslas had started blaring and sending out SOS to owner’s mobiles, with seatbacks locked and so forth. It makes the next car in the same parking lot a little less lucrative and spending more time looking for items in those cars less inviting.

 

[gavine]

If you have nothing valuable in the car, why not just leave the doors unlocked? I wonder if these thieves even attempt opening the door first or if they just assume it's locked.

 

[electronblue]

So what you are saying is that the correlation between decriminalizing such crimes and the observed rise of said crimes is pure coincidence?

Of course not. It plays a role. A big one.

It is just not the only role being played. From a multitude of targets with a range of obstacles the thieves tend to be human and go for the easiest prey and give up sooner on the hardest thus limiting the extent or frequency of damage towards the latter targets.

Tesla design has been making this attack extra easy on the robbers unfortunately.

 

[Kant.Ing]

Recall to convert all Model 3 cars to convertible, and roll/fold the fabric top when parking in public. I know it's absurd.

 

[Ardie]

Oh, I dunno. I suppose its cheaper than replacing the windows with ones made with transparent aluminum.

-- Ardie
And it isn't just for Star Trek anymore.

 

[whitex]

As I said in another reply on one of these threads, if locking people up worked, we’d be the safest county on the planet. Yet somehow we’re not, by a longshot. Probably time to get together and think through some solutions that rise above the preschool level of “do something bad, go to timeout”.

You don't have to lock everyone up to decrease the incentive to break the law. Think speeding. Most speeding cars are not pulled over, if for no other reason than practicality. However, if you introduced a law that says you cannot be pulled over for speeding and you cannot be charged more than $100 ticket for speeding if you are pulled over for some other probable cause while speeding, do you think there would be more people speeding? If you do, then you do agree that you don't have to lock up everyone in order for something to be a deterrent. If you think there would be no more people speeding with no fines or jail for speeding, I think we best end the discussion here and agree to disagree.

 

[whitex]

It does not seem unlikely that lack of interior alarm (with mobile alerts) and lack of lockable rear seatbacks in Teslas has been making them a more lucrative target. Together with that suitably sized window it has been the perfect storm. Put in laminated double glazing, locked seatbacks and interior alarm like some other manufacturers do and it might not be so lucrative. It all adds up. Tesla has standard interior alarm (with mobile alerts) in some markets like Europe so it may be a little less inviting there. For some reason Tesla did not make it standard in the U.S. nor even optional from factory.

There are stories of entire parking lots of Tesla’s being broken into while leaving other cars intact. They are high-end targets with minimal protection so far. That would probably be at least a somewhat different story if each one of those Teslas had started blaring and sending out SOS to owner’s mobiles, with seatbacks locked and so forth. It makes the next car in the same parking lot a little less lucrative and spending more time looking for items in those cars less inviting.

I think you missed my point. Adding locking and alarm now doesn't help. If they did it from the beginning, maybe would help some, but keep in mind, this is still seen as a rich person's car, therefore a target for "good stuff", and all the locking in the world won't help if a large portion of owners don't lock the back seat. If you want a solution for today, you need a visible deterrent, for example:

 

[electronblue]

I think you missed my point. Adding locking and alarm now doesn't help. If they did it from the beginning, maybe would help some, but keep in mind, this is still seen as a rich person's car, therefore a target for "good stuff", and all the locking in the world won't help if a large portion of owners don't lock the back seat. If you want a solution for today, you need a visible deterrent, for example:

I agree. Tesla failed to design for this epidemy when they decided to not implement interior alarm or lockable seatbacks in the U.S. and this decision is making the epidemy worse for Tesla owners now. For example Model 3 would have been another perfect opportunity for Tesla to implement both interior alarm and lockable seatbacks as standard.

That said implementing them now as standard for future cars would still give some remedy over time as they gained a larger pecentage of the fleet so I would still love it if Tesla did it.

None of this will stop all thieves but taken together these two rather simple measures (interior alarm with mobile alert and lockable seatbacks), once they would be a considerable portion of the fleet, would likely mean thieves spending a little less time thieving at Teslas. Especially in locations where they have been targeting multiple Teslas in close proximity.

As a further idea but granted harder and more costlier to implement than the two above, high-end European manufacturers have gotten some success and made breakins harder with laminated double glazing. They are not quite as easy to get through again slowing down the perps a little and making the cars that less lucrative...

 

[Decibelle]

I also think laminated glass would be a good idea, but isn’t there some law prohibiting laminated glass being used on side windows in case the need arises for quick access by first responders in case of an emergency?