Suspension Problem on Model S

[stopcrazypp]

Oh, and reading the WSJ article, this discrepancy struck me, having just read the LA Times article...

WSJ:

LA Times [http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-tesla-suspension-response-20160610-snap-story.html]:

I do not know the OP's nor understand his motivation in all this, but his loose relationship with facts does not help the credibility of his message.

As others point out, the use on dirt road doesn't particularly matter. The car was out of warranty already anyways from mileage. What's more interesting is the allegation that an inspection was done just 2 weeks prior and somehow this was missed.

However, I don't think the OP is really the thing Tesla took exception with, but rather the Daily Kanban article as a whole and the accusation that Tesla was doing a cover-up. Not seeing the point in trying to over-analyze the OP's situation.

 

[techmaven]

Ah, yeah, a better reading of the Tesla warranty booklet says,

"This New Vehicle Limited Warranty does not cover any vehicle damage or malfunction directly or indirectly caused by, due to or resulting from normal wear or deterioration, abuse, misuse, negligence, accident, improper maintenance, operation, storage or transport, including, but not limited to, any of the following:

Driving the vehicle off-road, over uneven, rough, damaged or hazardous surfaces, including but not limited to, curbs, potholes, unfinished roads, debris, or other obstacles, or in competition, racing or autocross or for any other purposes for which the vehicle is not designed;"

So it's not that driving off-road is the problem, but the vehicle damage or malfunction as a result.

 

[X Yes?]

What's the problem to sign a NDA?

You can choose not sign it

Just pay your repair cost for your unwarranted car

Tesla has calculated that to be an expensive proposition PR wise, thus fix and NDA.

Those that signed and believed they could not reveal safety defects, are now likely to come forward and tell their story.

 

[bonnie]

Tesla has calculated that to be an expensive proposition PR wise, thus fix and NDA.

Those that signed and believed they could not reveal safety defects, are now likely to come forward and tell their story.

Yeah. I'm stunned at the number of additional stories coming out now that NHTSA has clarified that Tesla shouldn't do what Tesla hasn't been doing, though a known anti-Tesla blogger accused them of that. Stunned.

To be clear. I don't see any stories. No additional folks coming forward. Keep in mind that most X and S owners are fairly well-off & didn't get there by being doormats. Look around this forum. Do you see anyone who would think they couldn't contact a government agency if they thought there was a real problem? Neither do I.

 

[X Yes?]

To be clear. I don't see any stories. No additional folks coming forward.

Were you expecting that to happen within the hour?

 

[bonnie]

Were you expecting that to happen within the hour?

You must be new here. This forum explodes within seconds of anything that remotely resembles raw meat.

 

[SW2Fiddler]

You do know that these are mostly Keef Wivaneff, right? With crashed vehicles. Keef has been stuffing NHTSA's complaint box for a long time.

"+1"
Not only is the name made up, it shows absolutely no pretense at being a real name. I mean, come ON.
Say it out loud. "Keef Wivaneff." = "Keith, With An F."
please...

 

[X Yes?]

You must be new here. This forum explodes within seconds of anything that remotely resembles raw meat.

Understand. I'd give it a few weeks or months.

 

[WilliamZ]

Right, they warned Tesla to not do something that they are not doing.

If the DoD warns you not to set off nuclear bombs in your garage, does that mean you are doing so?
Or does that simply mean that the DoD got some bad information from your neighbor that doesn't like you?

This has nothing to do with DoD or setting off nuclear bombs. But, following your philosophy, DoD will give "me" a warning on it without investigating. Very interesting. I would assume NHTSA followed your philosophy, too. Even more interesting.

 

[Dr ValueSeeker]

They probably added a line clarifying that it is not prohibited to notify NHTSA about safe issues (not that the OP thought that in the first place, as noted in the article). I speculated that, but didn't post it. I didn't really expect them to stop using NDAs since NHTSA's comments didn't say the use of NDAs for goodwill repairs are improper (even though a bunch of people commenting so far have implied that).

Read this. Experts mostly agree, the NDA is unheard of.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/business/tesla-model-s-nhtsa-suspension-failure.html?_r=1

Ms. Krebs said she had never heard of a car company requiring customers to sign confidentiality agreements in exchange for repairs of potential safety defects. “It does raise eyebrows,” she said. “It may have happened before. I’ve just never seen it.”

 

[techmaven]

Tesla has calculated that to be an expensive proposition PR wise, thus fix and NDA.

Those that signed and believed they could not reveal safety defects, are now likely to come forward and tell their story.

Again, NDA's only signed by people out of warranty that were extended good will repairs or cost sharing.

Given that the oldest vehicles are only approaching 4 years old, the entire Model S fleet is still under warranty by age. Those that are not by mileage, some of those people bought extended warranties. So you're down to those that have driven the car more than 12,000 miles a year that took delivery in 2012, and then progressively higher amount annually for newer cars. If you are out of the base warranty for a 2014 vehicle, we're talking people driving 20,000+ miles a year. Just how many people do you think that would be that were also extended good will repairs/cost sharing? Also remember that Tesla has been growing at something like 50% a year. There are only 7,657 Model S's delivered in 2012, and another 22,442 in 2013. Just how many people do you think would be coming out of the woodwork?

There are something like 110,000 vehicles delivered after 2013... that are unlikely to be covered under any NDA. You are hoping for a very small number of possible people to come out to disclose something that the rest of us 120,000 or so that are clearly not under NDA haven't disclosed.

 

[X Yes?]

Read this. Experts mostly agree, the NDA is unheard of.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/business/tesla-model-s-nhtsa-suspension-failure.html?_r=1

That's from the lamestream media, what does Fox News say?

 

[luca]

Tesla has calculated that to be an expensive proposition PR wise, thus fix and NDA.

Those that signed and believed they could not reveal safety defects, are now likely to come forward and tell their story.

Whatever tesla do? They do not need to repair your car for free. You can choose pay your cost

then report issue to anyone you want

no one block you

What's the problem

TESLA HAS NOT FORCED YOU TO SIGN NDA

LOL

 

[luca]

Read this. Experts mostly agree, the NDA is unheard of.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/business/tesla-model-s-nhtsa-suspension-failure.html?_r=1

SO did they heard GM ignition, toyota unintended accelerate?

 

[X Yes?]

Whatever tesla do? They do not need to repair your car for free. You can choose pay your cost

then report issue to anyone you want

no one block you

What's the problem

TESLA HAS NOT FORCED YOU TO SIGN NDA

LOL

Thanks for that. I think I got it now.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Tesla has calculated that to be an expensive proposition PR wise, thus fix and NDA.

Those that signed and believed they could not reveal safety defects, are now likely to come forward and tell their story.

Not following this. Tesla's only adding something clarifying NHTSA reports are not prohibited. So there might be a few NHTSA reports filed (presuming there even exists people who thought those were prohibited in the first place; the OP is a clear counter-example to that suggestion). However, the NDA still prohibits people from coming "here" to tell their whole story.

 

[X Yes?]

SO did they heard GM ignition, toyota unintended accelerate?

Sure they did. Both of those companies paid out a fortune. It was all over the press for months.

 

[X Yes?]

However, the NDA still prohibits people from coming "here" to tell their whole story.

They are now certainly free to reveal safety concerns to the NTSHA. That's public info

 

[Tam]

...However, the NDA still prohibits people from coming "here" to tell their whole story...

There are still active conversations here in this very forum so what's the fuss about?

 

[stopcrazypp]

Read this. Experts mostly agree, the NDA is unheard of.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/business/tesla-model-s-nhtsa-suspension-failure.html?_r=1

They aren't much of an expert then. Google "lemon law confidentiality agreements". Such legal devices are quite commonly used by automakers, but they aren't reported on because the agreement prohibits discussing the existence of it in the first place.