jimm01
Member
I've received so much misinformation from numerous Tesla rep's that I cannot but reasonable assume none of what they say is credible, Even when it's in my favor. If for no other reason these people need go through discovery.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Solar Roof, big price increase
- Thread starter nicholb
- Start date
Yes they are really stretching the definition of the English language. It's a binding agreement with penalties for us if we back out after a specified date, but not a contract? I emailed both the rep and resolutions immediately after the call to describe what was discussed. If they fail to clarify in writing that is on them. The rep also refused to answer my emails and then called me and said "oh sorry I'm 2 days behind on my emails". Right...
jimm01
Member
When I was in the business a signed proposal was as good as a contract, at least in NJ. I guess their payment schedule is just a suggestion also.
Show them "Section 2" of the agreement where it mentions the "Contract price". There has to be some limit to this bullshit.
A legal notice will help them clear out that backlog.
A complaint acknowledgment from Contractor State License Board, FTC, Attorney general, BBB might also do the trick. It's in their best interest to drag this out, nothing will move till we escalate.
jimm01
Member
Tesla is implying it's an ‘agreement’ and they can breach it because the effects have no consequences to the other party. However. In NJ all home contractors must abide by the NJ Home Improvement Contractor (HIC) Registration Act, which defines what a home improvement contractor must provide and do, (New homes are covered by the New Home Warranty and Builders’ Registration Act). Then there’s the Home Improvement Practices Act which defines the practices all home improvement contractors must follow. For example N.J.S.A. 13:45A-16.1 12.ii states:A legal notice will help them clear out that backlog.
“A description of the work to be done and the principal products and materials to be used ed or installed in performance of the contract. The description shall include, where applicable, the name, make, size, capacity, model, and model year of principal products or fixtures to be installed, and the type, grade, quality, size or quantity of principal building or construction materials to be used. Where specific representations are made that certain types of products or materials will be used, or the buyer has specified that certain types of products are to be used, a description of such products or materials shall be clearly set forth in the contract;”
Although the penalties can be stiff, (i.e. barring a contractor from work), in most case, unless you’re a small business, the penalties are merely a flesh wound. In any case, in NJ if the Division of Consumer Affairs or even the AG decides to go after Tesla forcing them to execute the original ‘agreement’ is doubtful. Yet the following is what is possible if the Tesla’s ‘contract’ does not apply to the act:
“Contractors face significant potential liability when residential home improvement contracts do not comply with the Act and applicable regulations. A homeowner who proves a violation, and sustains an ascertainable loss as a result, is entitled to recover actual and treble damages, plus the homeowner’s reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. In addition, the Court likely will rule that the unpaid invoice is not collectible because the contract fails to comply with the Act and Regulations.”
In any case, I spoke to an attorney and was told in NJ since the is no other signed document titled a contract any ‘agreement’ must still adherer to the provisions of the NJ Home Improvement Contractor Registration Regulations, the NJ Home Improvement Practices Regulations, the Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, and the New Jersey Home Repair Financing Act.
As far as going to court goes, since the ‘agreement’ states small claims he believes it could be argued if damages exceed the limits of small claims the arbitration provisions could be repudiate. He also believes if Tesla violated NJ Law then one would still be sue Tesla violating their obligations under said laws and potentially “recover actual and treble damages, plus the homeowner’s reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.” The only thing is the homeowner will have foot the initial “fees and costs.”
Similar laws may apply in other states. Also, if one does sue they might what attempt to go it alone, Pro se. I’ve done this but the subject of litigation was in my area of expertise, and we never made it to court. In this case, since Tesla is a large ‘byzantine’ organization I would probably retain an attorney. Discovery may prove challenging and motions may need to be filed to the court. This is not a big deal but there are protocols and procedures that need to followed and one does not want to waste the courts time. But to tell the truth I might be fun to try anyway, just to see what ‘creativity’ Tesla attorneys comes up with. In short, when it comes to the consumer Tesla is a bad company who is trying to make good products. This will only work until there is viable competition. They need to fix this.
jimm01
Member
Maybe not new information but a pretty good synopsis of the lawsuits reported to have been filed:
onestepoffthegrid.com.au
"Classic bait and switch:" Tesla faces class action over Solar Roof price hike - One Step Off The Grid
Tesla accused of using "deceptive" sales tactics in class action lawsuit filed in response to up to 50% price hike of Solar Roof product.
onestepoffthegrid.com.au
If it's not a contract, does that mean the arbitration clause isn't binding?
"Tesla! We've developed electric cars, solar roofs, and Elon Musk's latest innovation: Schrodinger's Contract! It's only a contract if Tesla tries to enforce it!"
That's what I was questioning here several weeks ago - if they were sending out entirely new contracts, rather than following the letter of the unforeseen circumstances clause in the old contracts, why would the arbitration clause still be valid in the old contract? Either the entire thing is a valid legal document, or none of it is....
This is all I was able to get in writing. Usual BS about my "options" to have my project prioritized without addressing the contract, but the last sentence sounds fairly conclusive to me. They also didn't take the opportunity to dispute anything I asserted, which is something. I'm just trying to nail down their position so I have something to show the arbitrator. If they look at the agreement and say "nope, this is binding" then seems like we have a more iron clad case here. I also heard somewhere Tesla claiming this fell under the "unexpected circumstances at installation location" provision, so seems like they need to choose one argument or the other.
Are you still planning to arbitrate - and if so how do you plan to initiate the procedure if they don't respond to our resolutions emails?
The wording from Tesla does suggest they are relying on their rights in the contract to issue an updated price sheet (and not claiming there is no contract - I expect this was the rep being confused on the phone, and not an official Tesla position.) But, as you note, that right is not unlimited (the unforeseen circumstances being one time they can) so it would presumably come down to whether a court/arbitrator determines they can increase the cost (and then, if not, what the damages and remedy are.)
Very insightful, thanks! Speaking to my attorney friends, CA does seem to have similar protections, and I have been advised to start arbitration asap. In my case, I have made significant decisions and investments for my project banking on the existence of a solar roof. They cannot weasel out of this one.
FWIW: CA Contractor State License Board actually called me to answer some questions I had. They will be calling me back to get a verbal statement on the matter.
I'm delightfully surprised that someone actually called me back! I understand they are not going to represent me individually etc, but it's a ray of hope.
I'm delightfully surprised that someone actually called me back! I understand they are not going to represent me individually etc, but it's a ray of hope.
jimm01
Member
The exact verbiage in my agreement is:
“If Tesla encounters unforeseen conditions at the installation location or causes a change to the solar portion of your Solar Roof, you will receive an updated Price Sheet to accept or reject.”
I'm guessing yours's is the same.
This implies there was a CHANGE in condition at the worksite. As if they discovered latent damage; or after the agreement was signed a wind/rain damaged the roof; or there was an addition; or possibly the roof magically transformed into one with 4 elevation changes and 5 dormers. Tesla could possible claim force majeure but there is no force majeure clause.
Couldn't they trigger the "or causes a change to the solar portion" statement by just adding, removing, or relocating a single PV tile?
jimm01
Member
That isn't part of the statement. The way it is worded is seems to be two different conditions:
- If Tesla encounters unforeseen conditions at the installation location, you will receive an updated Price Sheet to accept or reject.
- If Tesla causes a change to the solar portion of your Solar Roof, you will receive an updated Price Sheet to accept or reject.
Similar threads
