I am curious about the step 2 you mention in other thread, quote below. I am wondering if a ruling in step 2 is binding, how is it funded and what are the expectations. My understanding from reading Norweigan
media report on Council letter contents is that now the burden of proof is on the claimants to prove their points in a higher level institution with some sort of data.
A ruling in "Forbrukertvistutvalget" is legally binding, but this is low court so unless there is talk about petty cash or a very weak loser this will be appealed to the "Tingretten", which is the first of three courts in Norway where the Supreme Court will be the third. The funding of "step 2" is done by the consumer rights board, over the state budget.
Bear in mind that the media reports are made to sell newspapers, but they are right that the burden of proof is now on our shoulders.
What have happened so far is that the "Forbrukerrådet" (FR) has received 193 individual complaints following their complaints being denined when directed to Tesla. All of these are of course not identical, and there are probably a certain degree of complaints that have been submitted "just to be in on it". What the various complaints have said is impossible to know, and FR told Tesla that due to the amount of complaints they could choose one (of the 193) to proceed with instead of treating all 193 as individual complaints. Apparently they chose one that complained about HP, 0-100, missing updates, etc. Wisely enough, that creates an opportunity to use the chewbakka defence.
Most of us that complained early focused solely on the missing 700 HP. That will now be the focus for the "step 2" - we will be very crisp on the fact that Tesla sold us a 700 HP car, and gave us a car that will never be able to produce that amount of power. Ever.
(700 HP is what they told the Norwegian DMV - which again made all the insurance companies base their premiums on that number. Now Tesla have reverted and is marketing the car as a 463 HP vechicle. This has also been communicated to the DMV, and people are getting money back from their insurance companies... as one of the things we can use as proof that Tesla oversold the P85D.)
The usual scenario here in Aus. when consumers are not happy with a product is to get a refund, no hassles. I have not heard of a cash handout being given. Perhaps Norway could be different. My expectation is, given Tesla's history, that Tesla is likely to push for buyback of your car rather than cash handout, in the case they lose in step 2. Is that a possibility?
It is a possibility, but that would be totally up to the court to decide. Even if Tesla offer a buy back, this would probably be deemed unreasonable as long as the FX have made the car 30% more expensive compared to orders made before Christmas last year. What has been suggested is that Tesla offer a Ludicrous upgrade as compensation as that at least would bring the car close to the promised 0-100. I know the media talks about claims for payback of the difference between the P85D and 85D, but that will never happen and is not expected. But how many of us would have chunked out the extra $25k for 47 HP and some red calipers if we knew that was what we were getting?
Sad, but I'm just not going to buy more products from a company that thought it was best to turn to and defend shady practices.
