Supercharging letter from Tesla 8-13-2015

[FlasherZ]

Just to add an example for #5: Saw someone park a classic car (ICE) in a very clearly marked *CLEAN AIR VEHICLE* parking spot yesterday (beside a Model S). And yes, the two guys that got out of the car could read English.

Hey, I can make the argument that my 1965 cars are indeed "clean air" vehicles, because they have some of the lowest amortized annual impacts on air quality when you consider the manufacturing process as part of the impact. They're certainly cleaner than the "throwaway" cars manufactured today.

 

[bonnie]

Hey, I can make the argument that my 1965 cars are indeed "clean air" vehicles, because they have some of the lowest amortized annual impacts on air quality when you consider the manufacturing process as part of the impact. They're certainly cleaner than the "throwaway" cars manufactured today.

And I could make the argument that you're a trouble-maker. :tongue:

 

[Nevek]

Infinity +1

Just to add an example for #5: Saw someone park a classic car (ICE) in a very clearly marked *CLEAN AIR VEHICLE* parking spot yesterday (beside a Model S). And yes, the two guys that got out of the car could read English.

Somewhat off topic but...

How do you like this for being ICED throughly? Burlington WA 7AM Saturday morning, enroute to Vancouver Island. They got all 8.

 

[TexasEV]

Just to add an example for #5: Saw someone park a classic car (ICE) in a very clearly marked *CLEAN AIR VEHICLE* parking spot yesterday (beside a Model S). And yes, the two guys that got out of the car could read English.

Clean air spaces are stupid. They remind me of old Doonsbury cartoons from the 70s with the Secretary of Symbolism. EV charging spaces serve a purpose. LEED should change their rules about this and stop sign pollution in parking lots unless it's to mark a EV charging spot.

 

[Krugerrand]

And I could make the argument that you're a trouble-maker. :tongue:

I don't think there's any argument about that! :wink:

- - - Updated - - -

Clean air spaces are stupid.

Stupid or not, that's not the point. :wink:

...and stop sign pollution in parking lots...

There was no sign pollution...the signage was on the pavement.

 

[bonnie]

Clean air spaces are stupid. They remind me of old Doonsbury cartoons from the 70s with the Secretary of Symbolism. EV charging spaces serve a purpose. LEED should change their rules about this and stop sign pollution in parking lots unless it's to mark a EV charging spot.

 

[Krugerrand]

Bonnie, that's called multi-purposing.

 

[SW2Fiddler]

Bonnie, that's called multi-purposing.

I imagined Wal-Manager saying, "Hmmm, the carts are emissions-free, the robo cart movers are electric, and the employee that gathers them is named Justin van Pool. So let it be written!"

 

[NigelM]

Infinity +1

Thank you. Call me Buzz, Buzz Lightyear.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Let's just note that it's poor etiquette by some owners that is causing issues in a few places, those people's actions aren't Tesla's fault. The cure you're advocating is potentially going to have far worse consequences for the vast majority of owners:

1. The long discussions on algorithms in this thread and the charging scenarios in other threads make one thing clear...There's no such thing as a short concise and specific policy. If you want a policy covering various eventualities you're going to end up with a handbook of rules.
2. Identification of individuals not abiding by those rules is not easy given the privacy implications. Clearly Tesla tried to avoid that with their mail algorithm which is why some folks received a letter even though they don't have a local Supercharger.
3. Enforcement is extremely difficult, if not practically impossible. Throttling is just going to block up the chargers even more. Cutting access completely is an extreme solution and watch out for the outcry over horror stories if/when a single mistake is made.
4. Why would the company set themselves up to become the Supercharger compliance police? Chances are pretty high that there's a nightmare PR story in that scenario.
5. Offenders will re-offend if they're not educated. With a full set of rules some folks will still ignore those rules or look for loopholes.

The best way to deal with this is to educate owners, set a good example, and spread the word as ambassadors ourselves. Persistent messaging from Tesla, with support of owners, will do the trick eventually.

I never said some people causing issues would be Tesla's fault.

Tesla's fault is starting to address a problem, without making it clear what the problem really is (and no, the conjecture on TMC by members is not necessarily at all the real or full extent of the problem Tesla is addressing here) - and then taking actions in a random-seeming manner. Contrast this to their previous sales message (especially by that non-dealership in-house sales force) and there is a communications issue out of Tesla that needs addressing.

Tesla is already policing Supercharging. They started this summer, it seems. They're just doing it badly from a clarity or accuracy perspective - or, the other option, they are doing real well and we just don't know what their true and full intent is. Cue in Supercharging anxiety.

Hence a clear policy would be the right thing to do. It doesn't have to be a manual, and it doesn't have to include throttling. Once again, there is a lot of reasonable middle ground between an all-out bible with inquisition - and the current innuendo we get.

I have no problem with being a goodwill ambassador for Tesla when they deserve it, as I'd be for any product I like and would recommend. But us having to fix Tesla's mistakes or attempt to interpret them in some positive manner to avoid confusion or embarrassment to Tesla doesn't sound healthy. Tesla needs to fix this - and then we can sing their praises for doing so.

 

[NigelM]

Hence a clear policy would be the right thing to do. It doesn't have to be a manual, and it doesn't have to include throttling. Once again, there is a lot of reasonable middle ground between an all-out bible with inquisition - and the current innuendo we get.

There's no innuendo, there is and always has been a clear policy for owners not to block local superchargers if they can charge at home; if those dozen words or so are too difficult for you then there's no point in continuing the conversation.

 

[Krugerrand]

There's no innuendo, there is and always has been a clear policy for owners not to block local superchargers if they can charge at home; if those dozen words or so are too difficult for you then there's no point in continuing the conversation.

I agree, Buzz.

 

[Nigel16494]

I don't want to burst your bubble or anything, but your faith in humanity exceeds mine. Policy, etiquette and $0.50 will get me a cup of coffee. I am not sure if you are in the Blink network, but they recently had a similar problem where policy isn't working. They now charge a penalty for people that over stay their welcome at the chargepoints. I don't disagree with you in principle but the rise in numbers of Tesla owners means that even if only 1% were inconsiderate that is a growing number.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I don't want to burst your bubble or anything, but your faith in humanity exceeds mine. Policy, etiquette and $0.50 will get me a cup of coffee. I am not sure if you are in the Blink network, but they recently had a similar problem where policy isn't working. They now charge a penalty for people that over stay their welcome at the chargepoints. I don't disagree with you in principle but the rise in numbers of Tesla owners means that even if only 1% were inconsiderate that is a growing number.

The Blink post-charging occupancy fees can serve as a counter example though. They had so much negative feedback they had to postpone it and also make it clear it applies only to certain L2 AC stations (not to DC chargers at all).

 

[TaoJones]

Somewhat off topic but...

How do you like this for being ICED throughly? Burlington WA 7AM Saturday morning, enroute to Vancouver Island. They got all 8.

That's infuriating - hopefully the WA fine/citation was utilized. I was at that SC last week and all 8 spaces were full, albeit briefly.

 

[iCAR]

There's no innuendo, there is and always has been a clear policy for owners not to block local superchargers if they can charge at home; if those dozen words or so are too difficult for you then there's no point in continuing the conversation.

If there is a clear policy, as stated above, why were these warning letters sent to select owners that are 30-50 miles from the nearest SC and have home-chargers for all of their local charging needs? If this letter was sent to all owners, we would all be focused on the same problem.

 

[NigelM]

If there is a clear policy, as stated above, why were these warning letters sent to select owners that are 30-50 miles from the nearest SC and have home-chargers for all of their local charging needs? If this letter was sent to all owners, we would all be focused on the same problem.

Because Tesla made a mistake in the algorithm used to identify owners. It became apparent up-thread that wrongly identified owners had started receiving a phone apology.

 

[cpa]

Because Tesla made a mistake in the algorithm used to identify owners. It became apparent up-thread that wrongly identified owners had started receiving a phone apology.

Well, Nigel, I live 125 miles from Manteca. I sent an email to Tesla Motors from my owner's page on their website the afternoon that I received their notice. I followed up with a call to Palo Alto this past Thursday, and the operator transferred my call to an employee who was away from her desk. I left a message requesting a return call to clarify my situation and to advise me if charging to 95% while I grabbed a bite to eat was considered improper. I have done this a grand total of 7 times since Manteca opened in February, four times from February through early April while working in Modesto where there is ZERO public charging availability.

I always check the stalls visually once my charge reaches 80-85% to see if there is congestion and would promptly move my car if there were 6 or more cars plugged in (8 stalls total.) I have not encountered more than 5 vehicles charging in any of my 7 visits, with the average number of cars at varying times of day hovering around two or three.

I have yet to receive any contact from Tesla, and tomorrow will be two weeks since receiving their correspondence. So, I am not convinced that Tesla is "making nice" for everyone who received this notification in error, unless my behavior puts me on the black list. I welcome your opinion! :smile:

Based upon the posters who received a phone call from Tesla, I seem to recall that there were two individuals who had a good relationship with their Service Managers. Since Tesla directs me to any number of Service Centers, depending upon availability, I do not enjoy a relationship like this with Service.

Finally, Tesla has to know who received these emails. It would have taken a few keystrokes to send out a contrite correction email briefly explaining what happened.

 

[Krugerrand]

Finally, Tesla has to know who received these emails. It would have taken a few keystrokes to send out a contrite correction email briefly explaining what happened.

Maybe nobody is currently holding that position and a new person is in training? :wink:

 

[NigelM]

I have yet to receive any contact from Tesla, and tomorrow will be two weeks since receiving their correspondence. So, I am not convinced that Tesla is "making nice" for everyone who received this notification in error, unless my behavior puts me on the black list. I welcome your opinion! :smile:
<snip>
Finally, Tesla has to know who received these emails. It would have taken a few keystrokes to send out a contrite correction email briefly explaining what happened.

That's a shame and btw I'm pretty certain Tesla doesn't have a blacklist.

Identifying who wrongly received the mail is by definition very hard as Tesla would need to correlate back to personal data on an individual basis.