FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
The inspector is only sent by Tesla to find additional unforeseen conditions so that they may charge more for their shoddy work.
-
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
seriously?
What exact damages?
You expect them to ==>lose<== $50,000 if they install
What if you went with a different company and had PV and batteries installed?
would you need to remove cabinets from garage? check
would you need to do general sheetrock and paint? check
would you need to remove trees for solar access? check
could most of the above be considered general maintenance? check
sheetrock can deteriorate and need replacement
paint?
things are always getting repainted
tree removal?
trees grow and can endanger houses and fall on them, again general maintenance.
witness a comment up the tread where someone is waiting 3/4 of a year to commingle a roof repair with a solar roof installation instead of repairing the roof.
exactly how were you damaged $50,000 if you were going to add solar and do you have receipts?
work doesn’t count, receipts for materials
would you not have had to do that anyway with another company?
Go back and read the highlighted part of your written, public statement, from the point of view of your adversary that is now public, discoverable knowledge, and believe me, a lot of people read, and archive TMC threads.
how would you interpret it in the worst possible light of an opposing attorney that is not your friend?
the arbitrator is also “not your friend”
they are dispassionate and look at facts
how would the arbitrator interpret your comment above?
i am not an attorney either, nor do i pretend to be one.
Last edited:
jimm01
Member
Before "Inspector Gadget" was about to leave he came and told me everything looked fine. So I pointed out all the damage that was done. So he started taking photos. This concerned me so I stuck up a conversation with him to ascertain his purpose and competence. I can't say I found any. So just what was this guy looking for and at: is his only skill that he can fly a drone and take videos? Based on outcome I can only surmise he sends the videos back to Tesla so they can have Stevie Wonder review them.The inspector is only sent by Tesla to find additional unforeseen conditions so that they may charge more for their shoddy work.
I acted in reliance of them honoring their contract ("reliance damages"), incurring expenses I would not have otherwise incurred, and losing some nice trees I would not have otherwise cut down. I am not indifferent to having my contract honored and having more expensive panels and batteries installed by competitors. The next highest quote I have from a PV installer is more expensive than the solar roof contract price for a lower capacity design with no batteries. If I were to follow your line of argument, my damages would then be "expectation damages", the difference in price between my original contract and the price of a comparable (solar shingle) product installed by a competitor, which would be a lot higher than the damages I am claiming - heck even the difference to regular PV + asphalt + battery would be a lot more expensive. There could be all kinds of reasons why cabinets need to be removed and trees need to be cut down, but in this case Tesla told me it was needed, so I did it. I can't read the mind of an arbiter, but I think most neutral third parties would look to the plain English wording of the contract to settle a dispute. Anyway I think these meet the definition for the applicable damages, but as you point out arbiters can do whatever they feel like. I'm happy to see how it all shakes out in arbitration based on the facts.
Targray has a solar shingle... wonder who can install it.
www.targray.com
Solar Shingles for EPCs, Contractors & Installers
Our solar shingles are designed for EPCs, contractors, and installers seeking a sleek, elegant PV system that integrates seamlessly with their building.
www.targray.com
So, to interpret your above statement
“.....- heck even the difference to regular PV + asphalt + battery would be a lot more expensive......”
and
“........The next highest quote I have from a PV installer is more expensive than the solar roof contract price for a lower capacity design with no batteries......”
For someone looking to poke holes in your argument, which can be expected
you saw a deal that was priced as “too good to be true” and took advantage of it with full knowledge of possible outcomes
that could be a very reasonable interpretation of your words, by an arbiter aware of them, but again i’m not an attorney nor do i pretend to be one.
when i put in my first PV system 22 years ago, I removed a walnut tree that was perhaps 50 years old at the time which was turned into lumber of a higher value, perhaps 1,300 bdft. and reroofed the house to provide a clean, unobstructed install, all necessary actions.
jimm01
Member
Sorry for not having drilled down into you prior post, or at least retained the details. However, I would like to offer my 'opinion'.
1) Make a punch list of all cost, intrinsic or otherwise. For non-intrinsic cost have quotes or receipts.
2) For intrinsic cost try to find similar judgments online. Preferably in the State of New York.
3) Review NY consumer protection, NY home improvement contract law, and NY home remodeling/contracting and licensing laws. For example in NJ home improvement contracts and bills of material have explicit requirements. Make sure the arbitrator aware of theses as they often included damages.
4) This is a longshot, and I’m not a lawyer, but if your original contact did not include a Powerwall, and Powerwall installation is now required, it could be considered a tying arrangement, particularly if one is not required to participate in demand response (Tesla’s grid services program).
The point is just be prepared and hit them with facts. You are perfectly within your rights, and speaking from experience win or lose you’ve exercised those rights and I believe you’ll have gained experience that could become valuable later.
Last edited:
As a lawyer, but not a construction lawyer, people should not miss what makes this unique: Tesla not only has a unique product but also has the ability to perform on the contract. I am interested if someone goes to arbitration as I could easily see an arbitrator ordering Tesla to simply perform because deciding that you have mis priced the project is not an “unforeseen circumstance.”
I believed Tesla's claims about the solar roof being cheaper than a regular roof + PV, a claim which appears to be gone from their solar roof page now, I believed the possible outcomes were spelled out in the contract, and I believed Tesla would honor the contract. Lots of people got the "too good to be true" price, which was based on detailed blueprints of my roof and a Tesla inspector coming out. It never crossed my mind that they would disregard our contract in this way, and I wouldn't expect or predict this even from a shady company. I certainly would not have spent this time and money and let them drill a hole in my roof if I predicted they would act like this. Not really sure why you are defending their behavior, or find it hard to believe that they harmed customers in a tangible way.
For your sanity, just take what winfield is saying with a grain of salt and move on.
At worst, he's trying to boast about how smart he is in his many years of wisdom, and demonstrate his awesomeness to be more successful than you and your solar roof project with Tesla. I dunno why he keeps bringing up his 22 year old solar projects though. That type of insight isn't really going to help you with an arbitration case in 2021 on a solar shingle roof.
At best, he's just pointing out to you the argument threshold you'll need to overcome if you wish to pursue further action. It won't be easy for you or anyone in a similar situation.
Either way, he's given you stuff to ponder, and hopefully your case with an arbiter is better prepared and your bases are covered. As I've been saying all the way back on page 2 of this thread, proving real, consequential damages is going to be very difficult for many people involved in this mess. Personally, I didn't think any lawyer would even bother to assist on a contingent basis; even people like bill_wolf couldn't get a lawyer to pursue further action (without a big fee of course).
If you feel you have a strong case for damages directly tied to the contract with Tesla, then you are in your right (and expectation) to attempt to collect on those damages. Good luck.
Yeah - I don't know why the idea of "too good to be true" came to be a defense to breaking a contract. Especially with a contract where there is asymmetrical knowledge - Tesla knows a heck of a lot more about how to price its solar roof than a typical customer - it is not reasonable for a customer to figure this out. But, even if it was, there was a valid contract signed, and it is perfectly reasonable for both sides to expect it will be carried out. It is not the customer's responsibility to worry about how profitable it is, nor is the job being unprofitable in and of itself justification for Tesla to back out. (And, I think it is particularly clear with the solar roof that Tesla intentionally took losses to build brand awareness, get experience, scale up, and find ways to lower costs over time, which is to point out that there are other considerations in a contract than just the money.)
And, just to be clear, Tesla does have some language in the contracts, which is clearly in dispute, and which might give them the right to cancel and/or re-price the contract. I am not arguing in the above one way or another whether that is valid - it is clear that will end up being determined for some in arbitration and/or a lawsuit. But I don't know how we have gone from discussing whether or not a breach actually did occur (a very legitimate debate to have) to somehow suggesting the customer is responsible if the company does not honor a contract just because they decided it is no longer in their interest.
i _am_ _not_ defending the behavior
i _am_ suggesting you should think about you post on public forums, that could be used negatively, that other entities scrape the comments on TMC and misuse
think about what you and others are posting and how those words could be used negatively by someone whom is not your friend and everything you are revealing and have already revealed.
@holeydonut
not really, but am pointing out I have done perhaps 10 re-roofing’s in my life, and am aware of some of the “gotcha’s”
(i also have a 2.5 yr old PV system, so thank yew very much)
i also have lawyer friends whose advise usually was
“keep yer trap shut, anything you say can and will be used against you”
so you folks are showing all your cards prior to anything
have at it, good luck to all
Totally agree. Folks that are posting comments on social media just do not understand, if they can, they will be used against them!!!!!!
Not a lawyer here - so someone please jump in if you are, but we aren't going to court, we are going to arbitration, and these are anonymous forums that don't describe any criminal behavior or intent. Unless I print them out and hand them to the arbitrator, not sure why you think this is even theoretically a problem on top of nothing actually problematic being said here.
Having seen examples of online presence being used in cases, winfield's and h2ofun's sentiment is still the safest approach. Evidence cannot be brought against someone if the evidence doesn't exist.
Most of our online avatars and usernames are linked in databases to our real identities. The amount of effort to truly go "dark" from an online identity standpoint is so high that the average user isn't really anonymous. Like I think someone on this forum accidentally doxed themselves by posting their real first and last name in a thread on this forum. Sometimes it's alarmingly easy to match someone's identity to their online avatar.
Somewhere there is a company making large sums of money to connect all my posts hating on PG&E and tying them to my real life identity and home address. And then, that same algo probably links me to my wife and she's got the mark of PG&E hatred on her in that database too.
All Tesla has to do is troll this thread, and pay a few bucks to map usernames to real life identities. If a real life name matches a request for arbitration, then they'll have comments to use in the arbitration. In front of an arbiter, they could show comments printed on paper for review. Then they'd show how that particular username has acted in the past and try to link it to that real identity. They'll ask if the person recognizes the username, postings, evidence as being part of their online activity having discussed the subject matter of the Tesla solar roof. If any of the postings even paint one iota of unfavorable perception, then that is in Tesla's favor.
From here the customer has some options.
1) They really do not recognize the posts (the database got it wrong), and they could say that posting isn't them and they don't recognize any of their evidence.
2) If they do recognize the posts as their own, they could tell the truth and admit they said these things. And now Tesla has evidence to use against that person.
3) If they do recognize the posts, they could tell a quick lie and say the evidence is wrong. But most people are poor liars; especially if confronted with something that they were not expecting to happen. But given time to prepare... anyone could be as good of a liar as George Costanza. Edit, sorry I meant to include this link.
4) Refuse to answer the question or acknowledge this evidence, which probably won't play out in a good way for the customer.
Last edited:
jimm01
Member
I think if you stay clear of libel or defamation you are ok. You can possibly uses online comments by others if it supports your case or if Tesla brings up your comments present similar comments to show some basis in fact.
jimm01
Member
One other point is to understand how the arbitrator is selected, that can be found here: AAA Arbitrator Selection | ADR.org . If you strike for an arbitrator perform your due diligence and research and rank your choices.
This. If they choose to bring in online comments, then many of them likely can be brought in, which includes the accounts of many of us who didn’t pursue arbitration for various reasons. I see that potentially causing just as many problems for them as it might help to ferret out one poster. That said, folks are going to have to point me to any post where someone is trying to pull as fast one or defraud Tesla in some way - I don’t remember seeing any.
Similar threads
