Actually I'm pretty sure DJRas said that he wouldn't drop the case for an olive branch he wants the whole tree. (Them to answer/remediate all claims in his suit.)
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software
- Thread starter Dutchmeeuw
- Start date
Actually I'm pretty sure DJRas said that he wouldn't drop the case for an olive branch he wants the whole tree. (Them to answer/remediate all claims in his suit.)
Well from Tesla's perspective I can imagine this variability is exactly what they don't want to or even simply CANNOT deal with. They may well believe that every single capped owner - or in fact EVERY owner if it turns out the issues are widespread - has a different assessment of what they're willing to accept, and from the moment an authority FORCES Tesla to act they would be overwhelmed by this process.
It's not just the cost of the packs, it's all the implications of openly dealing with everyone involved. I too fear they can't / won't be able to handle this.
Of course that's true. Tesla committed many crimes and will be beaten in court, badly. Tesla knows this, it's why they hired representation that is experienced with large scale corporate bankruptcy as well.
They can end the suit by simply reversing the cap. Today. That is full remediation, and easily accomplished in seconds. It's all anyone wants and is perfectly reasonable. Tesla has officially still claimed there is no purpose to the caps. Right up to the point the NHTSA forces a recall, they are free to fully remediate the issue and end the suit themselves just by reversing the cap.
It feels like that doesn't it? Tesla is faced with a simple choice of corporate suicide or communication with customers. They're so bad at communication they chose suicide.
They can end the suit by simply reversing the cap. Today. That is full remediation, and easily accomplished in seconds. It's all anyone wants and is perfectly reasonable. Tesla has officially still claimed there is no purpose to the caps. Right up to the point the NHTSA forces a recall, they are free to fully remediate the issue and end the suit themselves just by reversing the cap.
It feels like that doesn't it? Tesla is faced with a simple choice of corporate suicide or communication with customers. They're so bad at communication they chose suicide.
DJRas
Member
Not true.
At some point in this thread I spoke to the offer we made to Tesla internal counsel that we would pay a portion ($5k) for an upgrade to new 90 kWh packs. Tesla flatly turned that down and soon hired MoFo.
As Jason said, the ONLY fix is a new battery.
DJRas
Member
Just removing the cap is NOT enough.
The safety issue must also be understood. Capping is just a bandaid and pulling off the bandage will just re-open the wound.
Last edited:
I don't think you ever mention details of an offer, you only said Tesla wasn't willing to negotiate.
What about here:
You say that even if they restore the range some of the other 19 counts still have to be dealt with. Like why they did it in the first place.
DJRas
Member
According to the Q3 10-Q Tesla has over $900 million in warranty reserves. That should be enough to replace tens of thousands of battery packs.
I agree. Tesla still maintains there is no safety issue. If that's true they can safely remove the cap immediately ending the suit.
I think they're liars. Most of Tesla's defenders here think they're liars. I don't think anyone actually believes there is no safety issue. But since officially they don't claim there is a safety issue, they can remove the cap at any time. They
I believe they escalated their expenses and impact of the suit on their future because they hid a safety recall from all of us. The NHTSA is working with us because they're coming to the same conclusion. The results of that investigation will help the class action regardless of how Tesla responds to it.
s
tesla's increase in warranty reserves comes from no longer supporting their warranty. It's not just our batteries, it's also brand new yellow screens and Model 3 paint flaking off, et cetera. they have stopped paying for warranty issues in general.
DJRas
Member
They report spending $39 million on warranty repairs. I believe their increase in reserves is from selling a whole bunch of Model 3s.
DJRas
Member
Additional information on the legal side.
Since this is now in the court records.
We have added Lieff Cabraser Heidmann & Bernstein to our side of the case.
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP - Champions of Justice
Additionally, MoFo is proposing mediation. We are reviewing that proposal.
Edited to correct mediation (rather than mitigation)
Since this is now in the court records.
We have added Lieff Cabraser Heidmann & Bernstein to our side of the case.
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP - Champions of Justice
Additionally, MoFo is proposing mediation. We are reviewing that proposal.
Edited to correct mediation (rather than mitigation)
Last edited:
They only spent $5 million more on warranty versus the year before even though sales were up so much more over the previous year. Per car warranty is much less overall - they actually provisioned $50M less for Q319 than they did for Q318. Revenue wasn't significantly up when they posted Q3 profits, spending is down. Spending on things like warranty.
Congrats on bringing in the big guns!
Best news for everyone! Thank you for your dedication. You've helped us all, even the folks that told you to stop.
Congrats on bringing in the big guns!
Best news for everyone! Thank you for your dedication. You've helped us all, even the folks that told you to stop.
jkennebeck
Member
Please let us know the proposal as soon as you can. Fingers crossed it is something worthwhile! Thanks David.
DJRas
Member
Mediation likely won't be completed until January or February.
That is IF we agree to mitigation.
Otherwise, the case proceeds.
Edited to correct Mediation (rather than mitigation)
Last edited:
DJRas
Member
Also from Teslafi data:
Pre-batterygate/chargegate from 10% to 95%
Rescent 1% to 95%
Pre-batterygate/chargegate from 10% to 95%
Rescent 1% to 95%
Ok guys, first attempt to do like the tech told me to, drive the car down to under 15% then home charge full, i just did lastnight, this morning it showing up 229miles at 98%. Fan is running like usual to keep battery cool (maybe) thats why the battery is not at 100%. But it increasing the range .
Attachments
They could be fighting more delaying actions. Mitigation is a good step, but they might just be pulling a Darth Vader "pray we don't alter the deal further" scam to waste more time. If Tesla wanted to handle this quickly they wouldn't have waited this long to make the offer.
Then again Lieff Cabraser's involvement might have scared some sense into Tesla. They beat Apple.
@Nick70d If you aren't capped, a couple cycles like that will help your BMS recalibrate and balance. If you are capped, it's just a time wasting exercise.
What does "mitigation" mean? Does it have a specific meaning in legalease?
You shouldn't let the car sit at over 90%. If you aren't driving anywhere soon, I'd use the app to set the climate control to high and open the sunroof. The battery should be down to 90% in an hour or so (well, assuming it's cold/cloudy enough for the heat to run; I've only used this trick in the winter).
Similar threads
