Instead of Limited Hours, could you put the words “Valet Only” as well as a regular red pin?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Supercharger - Los Angeles CA - Francisco Street (LIVE 6 Mar 2019, Hotel Indigo, Valet Only!)
- Thread starter Halcyon88
- Start date
-
- Tags
- California supercharger
Charger is 2/10 available right now. So there are at least 2 people willing to pay lol.
As long as my Tesla clearly notes that this is a valet-only supercharger (perhaps a pop up confirmation when navigating?) I don't see anything inherently wrong with this arrangement. Personally I won't ever use it but I don't see anything wrong - more options are clearly better than fewer. If a private entity is willing to pay and install superchargers, then more power to them.
I just don't want some unsuspecting person to be guided there by the nav expecting to be able to charge on their own time then being forced into a valet and an $11 charge.
I just don't want some unsuspecting person to be guided there by the nav expecting to be able to charge on their own time then being forced into a valet and an $11 charge.
In car navigation does states that it is valet only and parking fees apply.
Thanks, good to know. That is certainly appropriate.
I think most people understand that “valet only” means there will be a cost. I think that Tesla and the hotel should agree on a fixed cost and that should be stated in the car nav.
This is what I was going to say. If the business wants to have it there and tesla agreed more power to them. I will never complain about a new location. Better to have it there than not.
That's only when you click on the supercharger, right? What happens if someone is navigating from say San Diego to San Francisco? Is the nav smart enough to ignore this location in favor of the free alternatives nearby or would it be possible for someone to be routed to this location without them knowing it's valet only?
Last edited:
We could sue try to sue Tesla? Didnt disclose its valet only and not self serve? I wouldnt want to but I think it would work. I just want it either fixed where I can charge my car or removed from the nav in my car. It's very frustrating. Closest charger to me and I cant even use it.
WinterDragoness
Member
I went there yesterday. First tried to head down into the parking structure. It says "Press for ticket" on screen, yet 30 seconds later after a few presses a lady comes on the speaker instead. I say I'm looking for the Tesla superchargers and she says they're for guests and residents only. I asked if she was sure, that superchargers are always public, and she said she was sure. So I pulled off to the side to investigate online and a valet came up to me and said they were valet only. I said no thanks and moved on to another location.
I didn't notice anything on the car map saying the location was valet only and I thought I looked when I couldn't find the place at first, but I might have missed it because I didn't even think that was a possibility. In-car navigation definitely routed me to this location and didn't warn me it was unusual. It could have sent me to other locations.
I don't like that Tesla spent money to install chargers at a location that charges $11 to use them. If the location actually paid for the chargers, then I worry it sets a precedent that Tesla will reduce their own public installs because paid installs save them money.
I guess as long as it doesn't become a pattern, then more chargers are better. But add me to the camp that will never use them except in some unlikely emergency.
I think my map also said 8/10 available which makes me wonder if that means two are still under construction or hogged by staff or something.
I didn't notice anything on the car map saying the location was valet only and I thought I looked when I couldn't find the place at first, but I might have missed it because I didn't even think that was a possibility. In-car navigation definitely routed me to this location and didn't warn me it was unusual. It could have sent me to other locations.
I don't like that Tesla spent money to install chargers at a location that charges $11 to use them. If the location actually paid for the chargers, then I worry it sets a precedent that Tesla will reduce their own public installs because paid installs save them money.
I guess as long as it doesn't become a pattern, then more chargers are better. But add me to the camp that will never use them except in some unlikely emergency.
I think my map also said 8/10 available which makes me wonder if that means two are still under construction or hogged by staff or something.
No, it means that some people pay 11$ to charge! It’s weird how no one comes up with the obvious solutions!
AMPd
Well-Known Member
Not sure if serious or joking.
There’s a difference between not being able to charge and not wanting to pay fees.
And also
AMPd
Well-Known Member
I’d use use this supercharger over Culver City anytime
Last time I was in LA I didn’t need a supercharger, the hotel I stayed at had a HPWC. But we visited the mall in Culver City and just for fun drove by the SC and it was full with a line.
I’ll rather pay 11 dollars and save time not waiting to plug in. But that’s just me, but I’m sure there’s others like me.
WinterDragoness
Member
You're right - I saw on the in-car map that 1 of 10 was being used yesterday. I just found it interesting that before I posted, everyone had mentioned 2 were in use. I wasn't trying to claim nobody pays $11 to charge.
Here's where in-car map shows Parking fees apply. Valet only:
I do think it's a big problem that in-car nav routes you through this charger like it's a standard charging location.
Agreed. The nav should route you to free-to-enter superchargers first, then self-service in a paid garage, then valet-only in a garage as a last resort. Or at least give us an option on the routing algorithm (i.e. shortest distance, free only, fastest, etc.).
Similar threads
