-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Lemon Model S owner Rebuttal to Tesla's Blog Post
- Thread starter montgom626
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model S
This is the only video I've seen:
King of Lemon Laws files suit against Tesla - YouTube
Was there another one?
There was one the owner put up but took all four videos he had down after he got too much public attention because of Menga.
You can see at 50 seconds in the video the rear lights flash when the car does unlock. Maybe not proof of faking the video but also not proof there is a problem.
You can see at 50 seconds in the video the rear lights flash when the car does unlock. Maybe not proof of faking the video but also not proof there is a problem.
Last edited:
A couple more points on the veracity of the video:
1. At 0:48-0:49 when the handles present, it does not appear to me that pressure was applied at the correct time for the handles to open when they did. It appears they open right after the lights flash, suggesting they were unlocked with a fob press.
2. I would be interested to know if the fob non-detection reported by lolachamp would resolve spontaneously, as depicted in the video, or if unlocking the car would require a fob press or at least some positional adjustment of the fob away from the source of interference.
1. At 0:48-0:49 when the handles present, it does not appear to me that pressure was applied at the correct time for the handles to open when they did. It appears they open right after the lights flash, suggesting they were unlocked with a fob press.
2. I would be interested to know if the fob non-detection reported by lolachamp would resolve spontaneously, as depicted in the video, or if unlocking the car would require a fob press or at least some positional adjustment of the fob away from the source of interference.
That's an excellent point in #1. He taps it multiple times but the timing doesn't fit. If this was simply a demonstration of what the alleged problem looked like he should have said that. Otherwise they are faking it or purposely misleading people to think the video shows the alleged problem in action.
No. I even made the link bring you right to the section that matters. The original claim of the door handles "not working" was not related to lawyer's video, it was this guy tugging on the un-presented handles claiming the door wouldn't open.
Just curious, is it common practice in US to hire lawyers for issues like this? What sort of court deals with consumer complaints? In Australia, the body that deals with such disputes would be NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Lodging a complaint (online) is straightforward, and the process towards resolution is easy to follow, so hiring a lawyer would be expensive unnecessary overkill. It might be different in US.
Last edited by a moderator:
davewill
Active Member
It's not. It varies from state to state, but usually these claims can be handled through an arbitration process that does not necessarily require representation.Just curious, is it common practice in US to hire lawyers for issues like this? ... Lodging a complaint (online) is straightforward, and the process towards resolution is easy to follow, so hiring a lawyer would be expensive unnecessary overkill. It might be different in US.
Just curious, is it common practice in US to hire lawyers for issues like this? What sort of court deals with consumer complaints? In Australia, the body that deals with such disputes would be NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Lodging a complaint (online) is straightforward, and the process towards resolution is easy to follow, so hiring a lawyer would be expensive unnecessary overkill. It might be different in US.
Normally you work this out with the vendor. If that doesn't work then you have a choice of arbitration, small claims court, or going whole-hog with a lawyer. The problem in the U.S. that isn't in other countries is that the lawyer can work on commission so it costs the plaintiff nothing to sue. The plaintiff just has to find a lawyer that will take the case. This makes the first reaction of many in the U.S. "Sue first and figure it out later". The Canadian system is far better where the lawyer has to be paid up front and the loser pays for both legal fees. There is also a system of ombudsmen to catch the real problems that fall through the cracks. There are still frivolous lawsuits, but they are far less common and "I'll sue" isn't the first thought when a problem arises.
purplewalt
Active Member
Yep.
After viewing the video, it seems to be an open-and-shut case.
The lawyer is at the top of his game, and has all the goods on Tesla.
I am sure he has completely swayed public opinion with this devastating video, and conducted himself in such a manner that sets a NEW higher standard for all other lawyers to aspire.
<<<<tongue planted firmly in cheek>>>>
My actual insight:
"The King" is simply looking for a payday and to further self-promote his win against Mercedes.
The Client is probably looking for his second payday (Volvo being his first) and perhaps cash and a free car (similar to the Mercedes case).
The LAW should be able to figure this mess out, and give them what they deserve for such shenanigans: disbarment and a hefty monetary fine.
In Florida you *must* use arbitration prior to going to any true court, unless there is an injury involved. This is true for most of the states, but I couldn't tell you which ones don't require it, as I only do cases in Florida. A very small percentage of cases I've seen have had lawyers involved. Maybe 1 or 2. I doubt lawyers can take these cases on contingency, because if the vehicle is found to be a lemon there is no punitive damages and the only cash is to reimburse for out-of-pocket repair expenses, and the repurchase money I mentioned earlier. Since most cars are financed, there's not much cash involved.
But this is not the case for Wisconsin where this Lemon lawyer is. They have 2x punitive damages. Oh, and you get to drive a nice car for a year for free.
Even with no punitive damages, being a serial lemon law litigant allows you to drive expensive luxury cars for free. For scammers, that's inducement enough.
gg_got_a_tesla
Model S: VIN 65513, Model 3: VIN 1913
Brought myself to finally see that video. Tesla, please do NOT give in to this scum of a lawyer who brings a bad rep to that profession as a whole. I don't care to pass judgment on the car owner himself and his motives but, this lawyer should not get a penny out of this.
Looking forward to a spirited fight from Tesla a la Brodergate.
Looking forward to a spirited fight from Tesla a la Brodergate.
NigelM
Recovering Member
So is this the original video that was removed from uTube or a new or edited version?
In *this* video the only problem shown was that the door handles do not present until the key-fob is clicked as indicated by the rear lights flashing. So not a biggie, just click the key-fob in your pocket as either the attorney did, or someone standing nearby did, causing the lights to flash & the handles to present. And get it fixed at the Service Center.
The only other complaint is that car has been in shop for 66 days total, but that could mean a lot of things and be calculated in self-serving ways. Oh, and he mumbled something about 'battery failure' but plaintiff acknowledges this is about the separate plug-in-the-wall charger unit, not about the car at all.
Just trying to summarize from point of view of another MS owner for benefit of outsiders who may wonder about this repeat video presentation. All this has been said before.
--
In *this* video the only problem shown was that the door handles do not present until the key-fob is clicked as indicated by the rear lights flashing. So not a biggie, just click the key-fob in your pocket as either the attorney did, or someone standing nearby did, causing the lights to flash & the handles to present. And get it fixed at the Service Center.
The only other complaint is that car has been in shop for 66 days total, but that could mean a lot of things and be calculated in self-serving ways. Oh, and he mumbled something about 'battery failure' but plaintiff acknowledges this is about the separate plug-in-the-wall charger unit, not about the car at all.
Just trying to summarize from point of view of another MS owner for benefit of outsiders who may wonder about this repeat video presentation. All this has been said before.
--
Or the key fob was not detected, and then it was detected. Clicking the fob is not necessary.
With the tech package, auto-extend enabled, and the car locked, the lights flash and the handles extend. Without the tech package, or with auto-extend disabled, I'm not sure.
