chipmunk
Member
My guess is that he signed it before Monday but was so upset about what was being said that he couldn't help but correct some things.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
It doesn't matter at all about the NHTSA report, whether he told us, when he did it, whatever.
What is wrong is that Mr. Price of NHTSA did not tell him the ball joints were of poor quality, as Mr. Cordaro said he did. NHTSA also asked him to stay quiet until they completed more research, and he didn't. As it turns out, 37 out of 40 reports are fraudulent. Mr. Cordaro also leveled accusations against Tesla that are unfounded - that there is a design defect in the ball joints. He has no evidence to back that up. The failure of his ball joint is not evidence for a design defect. There are many possible reasons why his ball joint failed.
@Yeoman - since there was no context for the pictures that establish what was posted about them, the reports are fake. Have you read them?
What is wrong is that Mr. Price of NHTSA did not tell him the ball joints were of poor quality, as Mr. Cordaro said he did. NHTSA also asked him to stay quiet until they completed more research, and he didn't. As it turns out, 37 out of 40 reports are fraudulent. Mr. Cordaro also leveled accusations against Tesla that are unfounded - that there is a design defect in the ball joints. He has no evidence to back that up. The failure of his ball joint is not evidence for a design defect. There are many possible reasons why his ball joint failed.
@Yeoman - since there was no context for the pictures that establish what was posted about them, the reports are fake. Have you read them?
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Admitting you posted something fake does not make it any less fake. And the "reports" the guy posted was him looking at pictures and giving his analysis. NHTSA did not say they considered any of his reports. The only claim we have is the OP saying NHTSA looked at his ball joints, but no where was it reported that the NHTSA considered investigating any of what the guy speculated.
To make it clear, the NHTSA has said no formal investigation was launched. They only informally asked Tesla for more information and have not seen anything that suggests a safety issue with the suspension design.
mmd
Active Member
Whoa! Saw this in trading thread.
Contrary To Musk's Suggestion, NHTSA Did Not Call Tesla Suspension Complaints ‘Fraudulent’ - HybridCars.com
Contrary To Musk's Suggestion, NHTSA Did Not Call Tesla Suspension Complaints ‘Fraudulent’ - HybridCars.com
Maybe not but I'll go out on a limb and say that posting photos of wrecked cars does make them fake.
"oh look, here are photos showing a problem with the doors. Just ignore the fact that all of the cars were T-boned by another vehicle. Notice the crushed side of the door? Clearly defective."
hockeythug
Active Member
Also specific parts(control arms) that are engineered to break away during crashes.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I thought the article would have NHTSA making a statement that the complaints were not fraudulent. Rather, the article focuses on the fact the NHTSA did not make a statement saying some reports were fraudulent.
That part we already knew: Elon was the one who used that terminology, not the NHTSA. Also, they got at statement from NHTSA hotline operator a non-US citizen can report a tip about a US vehicle, however, the issue is not a tip given in the hotline, but rather multiple reports submitted on the NHTSA website where the person used fake addresses and fake VIN numbers. That's outright fraud.
Krugerrand
Meow
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
The point is less about the complaints and more about how this information was presented and interpreted on Friday.
One view, was that everything was completed and there is no issue. This seems to be the conclusion from many media reports based on their "analysis" of some tweets and a blog post.
The other, is that the NHTSA has all the information they need right now and no determination has yet to have been made. Which seems to be what this article claims.
There is a big difference between case closed and case being investigated.
Of course, the investigation may close with a conclusion that there is no issue, but maybe we can actually wait for that to happen before saying it did already happen.
Was how the accident was caused evident from the photos?
If a suspension goes out and the car loses control, would it be possible for the car to be T-boned in traffic?
I would expect that if one saw a corpse caused by an ignition switch failure, one would not immediately say "oh, the car was totaled in the accident, must be the ignition switch".
More importantly, is "T-boned" supposed to be capitalized or is t-boned the proper usage?
Maybe people can, you know, actually wait for the results of the investigation before jumping to conclusions either way.
I am sure that if the NHTSA determines that there was "outright fraud"and that some or all of the complaints were fraudulent, then they would remove them.
I would also expect that if there is such a determination of "outright fraud" that they would pursue whatever legal actions they can in order to maintain the integrity of the system and deter other people from "outright fraud"
Let's see what they their investigation actually determines before we "caste asparagus" all over the place.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Yet the entire "investigation" was created by "Keef" jumping to conclusions that every Tesla in an accident with damaged suspension parts must have been caused by those suspension parts, instead of the other way around, which is more likely. You could collect pictures of other vehicles in the same condition and make similar claims, without evidence, yet Keef, and people like you, only focus on Tesla. I wonder why...
Creating a hypothesis and using photos of totaled vehicles to validate your hypothesis might sound like science. However, in this case it's more in the realm of conspiracy theory, which fits very well with the pattern detection abilities of the perpetrator. Check out these photos from the moon landing. Obviously fake. Oh, and this SpaceX booster landing.
Is it possible that these photos imply some consistent issue? Sure. But that's the motivator used by every merchant of belief since the beginning of time. Possibility doesn't equate with probability.
Regardless, I agree with you as always, @Drivin. We can't be sure what the NHTSA will say until they say it. Also, T-bone should be capitalized.
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
You're trying WAY to hard to spin this.
The fact is Keith (LooseWheel, Lucille, Keef, I told you so) admitted filing the complaints with the NHTSA based on his analysis of photos he found online. There is no room for doubt.
hockeythug
Active Member
"Keef" obviously reached out to Niedermeyer who put a call into NHTSA to get some sort of comment. There was no press release before the fact by NHTSA.
NHTSA Investigation was never opened, so there will be no action of closing it.
NHTSA was in the preliminary screening phase as far as MS suspension safety complaints were concerned. As indicated by Musk, NHTSA reviewed all information contained in safety complaints and information provided by Tesla and determined that "there is no safety concern with Model S suspension and (they) have no further need for data on this matter." This means that based on preliminary screening NHTSA determined that since there is no safety concern, there no need to open investigation. There will be no further action on this matter.
You seem to be unfamiliar with the NHTSA Investigative Process, hence your mistaken speculation about closing investigation that was never opened to begin with.
For your edification:
NHTSA investigative Process
Agency technical experts review each and every call, letter, and online report of an alleged safety problem filed with NHTSA. Although NHTSA has no jurisdiction over defects that are not safety-related, it does review each report that suggests a potential safety defect involving groups of motor vehicles or vehicle equipment. There is no established number of reports that must be filed before NHTSA investigates an issue. The agency's Office of Defects Investigation investigative process consists of four parts:
- Screening -- A preliminary review of consumer complaints and other information related to alleged defects to decide whether to open an investigation
- Analysis -- An analysis of any petitions calling for defect investigations and/or reviews of safety-related recalls
- Investigation -- The investigation of alleged safety defects
- Management -- Investigation of the effectiveness of safety recalls.
Except investigation was never opened because NHTSA preliminary screening determined that there is no need for it. Nice try, but this well is dry - time to move on.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
The NHTSA does not have a policy to prune fraudulent complaints on their website. I read another article where it was mentioned that such fraudulent complaints exists in the other manufacturer's pages also (although probably not in anywhere the same 37/40 proportion). However, anyone can go on the NHTSA website and read for themselves to verify what Elon said. They don't need a statement from the NHTSA. And even the Keef guy had admitted to making up addresses and VIN numbers (sometimes in the posts themselves).
- Status
