Tesla Model X Cancellation

[AnOutsider]

In the purchase agreement for the car, you agreed not to file a class action lawsuit. I wonder if other manufacturers have similar purchase agreements.

Right, IF you are the same montgom that hired that wacky lawyer and filed a lawsuit based (from what I can tell) sketchy "facts", then I might also consider never selling to you again. Sometimes it's best to fire the customer (though after that, one might wonder why a customer would want to return to the fold).

Again, just thinking you might be because of the similar name and the nature of the post...

*edit* I see the email chain update... So maybe not the same mont, though it's still hard to tell.... but again, I don't know that I could blame Tesla in this instance. Though, as others have pointed out, this is definitely a strong argument for allowing independent franchises to sell the vehicle as well.

 

[Krugerrand]

With a reminder of what went on before, yep, I think it entirely fair that Tesla has severed dealings with you and may very well have been advised by their own council to do it. Maybe one of the new GM Bolts will be more to your liking.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Right, IF you are the same montgom that hired that wacky lawyer and filed a lawsuit based (from what I can tell) sketchy "facts", then I might also consider never selling to you again. Sometimes it's best to fire the customer (though after that, one might wonder why a customer would want to return to the fold).

Again, just thinking you might be because of the similar name and the nature of the post...

One might still be wise to think of the bigger picture, though. If you are the sole provider of a service and/or a product, and you have an interest in promoting that model of business where you remain a sole provider, and you deal with consumers, at some point someone might start screaming something about rights and protections of consumers.

I mean, you wouldn't want Krusty the Klown's Auto Shop parading this guy through some state congress.

 

[markb1]

Sure, this is discrimination, but of a perfectly reasonable sort. If you threaten to sue a company, that company would be foolish to continue to do business with you.

 

[Lloyd]

I think tesla reacted properly to your actions.

 

[dirkhh]

View attachment 76189

Removed my personal info from the file.

Attached is the email I have received....

Real quick the story:

Got P85+ in September 2014

Traded P85+ and Ordered P85D in Oct 2014 with Next Gen seats

Received P85D with the old seats without anyone from Tesla to notify me.

Didn't accept delivery and the whole thing started ...

No one from Tesla was able to provide any estimate of when I can get the seats replaced.

Offered resolution to Tesla: Built the car I ordered and paid for, provide rental in the mean time and agree if you fail again to pay $30k liquidated damages.

Tesla refused.

Tesla took back the P85D and on top of that cancelled my Model X reservation.

Now I have electric charger / Wall connector at home, but no Tesla car and I lost lots of money on the trade and on lawyers.

I would consider Tesla's response to be measured and appropriate. They came to the conclusion that it wasn't in their best interest to do business with you. I would tend to agree with their assessment.
You are not being discriminated against (discrimination: "unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex."). Unless of course "being a jerk" is the category of people you had in mind ;-)

 

[AnOutsider]

One might still be wise to think of the bigger picture, though. If you are the sole provider of a service and/or a product, and you have an interest in promoting that model of business where you remain a sole provider, and you deal with consumers, at some point someone might start screaming something about rights and protections of consumers.

I mean, you wouldn't want Krusty the Klown's Auto Shop parading this guy through some state congress.

Oh I agree, and trust me, I'll be the first to shout that Tesla isn't the benevolent deity many here make them out to be...

This situation (even though my instincts tell me I'd do the same if the history is what I think it is) is a prime example of why being the only game out there is a bad thing. Even if this buyer is an absolute nightmare, in a traditional system, they'd have the ability to go buy the same item elsewhere. You can add the experiences of those with salvage cars into that ring as well.

That said though... I can't blame them.

 

[Nevek]

Traded P85+ and Ordered P85D in Oct 2014 with Next Gen seats
Received P85D with the old seats without anyone from Tesla to notify me.
Didn't accept delivery and the whole thing started ...
No one from Tesla was able to provide any estimate of when I can get the seats replaced.
Offered resolution to Tesla: Built the car I ordered and paid for, provide rental in the mean time and agree if you fail again to pay $30k liquidated damages. Tesla refused.

Tesla took back the P85D and on top of that cancelled my Model X reservation.

Seems like a general lack of trust between parties trying to do business, why would you want to prolong the relationship?

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Oh I agree, and trust me, I'll be the first to shout that Tesla isn't the benevolent deity many here make them out to be...

This situation (even though my instincts tell me I'd do the same if the history is what I think it is) is a prime example of why being the only game out there is a bad thing. Even if this buyer is an absolute nightmare, in a traditional system, they'd have the ability to go buy the same item elsewhere. You can add the experiences of those with salvage cars into that ring as well.

That said though... I can't blame them.

I have no interest in the issue at hand, so I will leave that to the relevant parties. But I do have to wonder the wisdom of tying the Model X reservation to another dispute considering the business model Tesla is promoting.

Springfield Audi/Tesla thanks them, I guess.

- - - Updated - - -

Seems like a general lack of trust between parties trying to do business, why would you want to prolong the relationship?

It may become problematic when it is a consumer interaction and one party holds a monopoly over the sale of the product - especially when that party is promoting a new business-model in the business based around said monopoly.

I'm not sure I blame Tesla at all, but I worry about where such things might lead.

 

[stopcrazypp]

A tangent sprang to mind: Could this kind of event actually be a pro-argument for the dealer system? Imagine not being able to buy a product from any company, because they all come from a company.

Not that I'm pro dealer system.

While it may not be as wide ranging, the talk about the Montgomery lawsuit reminded me that I had read that dealerships do have inside blacklists for customers that are hard to deal with (which they do share with nearby dealerships). And a lot of people at that time called for Tesla to blacklist him from ever buying a Tesla again.

 

[ecarfan]

To @montauto: based on your other posts on TMC where you threaten to file what I believe is an unjustified class action lawsuit against Tesla , I think Telsa did the right thing in declining to sell you another car. I would do the same if I was in their shoes, so to speak. Your actions are not rational. I recommend you switch to another car manufacturer. Good luck.

 

[dirkhh]

It may become problematic when it is a consumer interaction and one party holds a monopoly over the sale of the product - especially when that party is promoting a new business-model in the business based around said monopoly.

I'm not sure I blame Tesla at all, but I worry about where such things might lead.

I wonder about your use of the term "monopoly". Tesla holds 0.x% of the car market. They are anything but a monopoly.
If State Farm decides that you are a high fraud risk and decides not to write insurance for you, would you call State Farm a monopoly? And State Farm has an agent system that's quite similar to the dealer system (with even one more layers of indirection), yet I know for a fact that they can and do refuse to offer insurance for some prior customers.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

While it may not be as wide ranging, the talk about the Montgomery lawsuit reminded me that I had read that dealerships do have inside blacklists for customers that are hard to deal with. And a lot of people at that time called for Tesla to blacklist him from ever buying a Tesla again.

True as that may be, there is always the next dealer. I can see someone making this argument and winning some minds with it.

"Consumers with fear instilled in them, don't ask for your rights, otherwise you'll never buy a Tesla again...", says Krusty the Klown, representative for Springfield.

- - - Updated - - -

I wonder about your use of the term "monopoly". Tesla holds 0.x% of the car market. They are anything but a monopoly.
If State Farm decides that you are a high fraud risk and decides not to write insurance for you, would you call State Farm a monopoly? And State Farm has an agent system that's quite similar to the dealer system (with even one more layers of indirection), yet I know for a fact that they can and do refuse to offer insurance for some prior customers.

Obviously Tesla doesn't hold a monopoly in the Standard Oil sense. This is not an anti-trust issue. However, they do hold a monopoly to selling new Teslas in many states.

 

[Merrill]

When you mention law suit or lawyers most companies will take that as a red flag, it is always better to start with honey than acid.

 

[Krugerrand]

Obviously Tesla doesn't hold a monopoly in the Standard Oil sense. This is not an anti-trust issue. However, they do hold a monopoly to selling new Teslas in many states.

He can buy a used one from a private individual.

 

[dirkhh]

Obviously Tesla doesn't hold a monopoly in the Standard Oil sense. This is not an anti-trust issue. However, they do hold a monopoly to selling new Teslas in many states.

You ignored my question. What about my comparison to State Farm or another insurance company?

 

[Zythryn]

If you feel you have been so poorly treated that you are talking to lawyers, threatening court action and class action suits, why in the world would you want to continue to do business with them?

BTW, I am absolutely sure the driver of your canceled car is absolutely thrilled with it (and the next gen seats they got installed for free after being patient for a few weeks/months).

 

[Merrill]

While it may not be as wide ranging, the talk about the Montgomery lawsuit reminded me that I had read that dealerships do have inside blacklists for customers that are hard to deal with (which they do share with nearby dealerships). And a lot of people at that time called for Tesla to blacklist him from ever buying a Tesla again.

As stated above we would tell that customer to find another dealership to do business and we would not do business with them in the future.

 

[Wolfgang Nomayer]

Yes it is fair! Why should they HAVE to sell you anything? Go ahead and show us the original letter you wrote! But then, i can only imagine what you wrote and i real'y don't want to see it. How about you get a life and move on! Looks like you are discriminating against Tesla and they should sue you for online slander! Are you a big 3 shareholder?

 

[AnxietyRanger]

You ignored my question. What about my comparison to State Farm or another insurance company?

Hard to say. Insurance is an entrenched business. What flies there may not fly elsewhere. Certain personal attributes are accepted there more easily due to the special nature of the business as well. It is hard to make the same claim with buying a car.

Tesla is trying to usher in a new model of doing business. They are being fought tooth and nail by a lobby of the entrenched model for doing so. I wonder if this is the best choice for that fight - or if they should build consumer protections into their own system that would satisfy eager legislators that independent checks and balances (aka dealers) are not needed.