Tesla Model X Cancellation

[montauto]

Now that I'm reading my past emails with Jerome and the legal council I offered Tesla to accept the car with the wrong seats at a discounted price, because it wasn't built to spec. Tesla refused saying that "all customers pay the same price" and I respect that.

My question to the Forum is : Since this car was built already and Tesla took it back, how can they sell this car again at the exact same price as they sold it to me? I've read somewhere such cars are being sold directly by the Service Centers at a lower price...

Is that true ?

 

[Johan]

My question to the Forum is : Since this car was built already and Tesla took it back, how can they sell this car again at the exact same price as they sold it to me? I've read somewhere such cars are being sold directly by the Service Centers at a lower price...

Is that true ?

What does this have to do with anything? They can sell the car at the price of a brand new car since it's brand new, if someone wants to pay. Or am I missing something here? All the cars are built in the same factory. Why would it matter if it was you who specced the car if I was going to want a car just like that anyway, and it's still brand new?

 

[Canuck]

If we're going to divorce with Tesla, the only way you get a divorce is in Court, isn't it?

I find it difficult to understand your posts. Is this suggesting that you are considering suing Tesla over this issue?

 

[AnxietyRanger]

The letter doesn't make sense to me. He claims that Tesla forced him to sign the papers without seeing the car solely for the tax credits in 2015, but he told Tesla he didn't need the tax credit in 2015. He says he could have waited until 2016 -- but Tesla "rushed" and "insisted" he sign before year end. So he signed. He could have refused. I also note later he says he is making payments on the car -- making payments but doesn't need the credits for another year....hmmm. Then he refuses delivery after he signed, the paperwork was done, all by his own free will, and AFTER being told he will get the next generation seats. That seems unreasonable to me and add that to his reference in the letter to this forum where he tried to rally a class action lawsuit. This letter hurts his position more than it helps him, in my opinion.

Again, I am not defending Tesla actions here. They screwed up. But that doesn't mean they have to keep doing business with the OP. Best to each go their separate ways, as Tesla said in reply.

Signing the documents should be irrelevant, though, because he didn't have a chance to inspect the vehicle yet. Why were the papers rushed? I guess that reason might matter. If the reason was the OP, that is on him, if the reason was Tesla's that might alter some views, I guess.

This seems to hinge most on whether or not it is unreasonable to refuse delivery of a car where you notice a material defect and the manufacturer is unable to give a timeframe for the fix? How reasonable any rallying and/or suing is, depends a lot on how unreasonably someone is treated in the first place, so one - I guess, objectively speaking - would have to assess how right or wrong the reason is for such action.

On the other side of the pendulum is the question, is cancelling another unrelated reservation a reasonable response to the situation from the side of the seller?

I guess these are the questions. To answer them fully, of course, I guess one would have to have a lot more complete image than we do. I won't try.

 

[montauto]

The letter doesn't make sense to me. He claims that Tesla forced him to sign the papers without seeing the car solely for the tax credits in 2015, but he told Tesla he didn't need the tax credit in 2015. He says he could have waited until 2016 -- but Tesla "rushed" and "insisted" he sign before year end. So he signed. He could have refused.

Yes, that was my mistake agreeing to sign the delivery papers without the car being there, but I trusted Tesla too much .... It's also to be noted that this preliminary signing process was not initiated by me, but Tesla. And now I understand why .... If I sign the papers in December 2014 this car will go in the Tesla books for 2014. If I sign in 2015 then it's for the next year / quarter. This is what happens when you try very very hard to please investors and be publicly traded.

I also note later he says he is making payments on the car -- making payments but doesn't need the credits for another year....hmmm.

I think you should pay more attention when you read the letter ... I said the payments for the car are due. I didn't say I made the payment.

Then he refuses delivery after he signed, the paperwork was done, all by his own free will, and AFTER being told he will get the next generation seats.

What do you mean by "after being told" ? No one told me about any issues with the seats at all not at signing and not at the time when I was called to accept the actual car. I discovered the discrepancy and brought it to their attention and on top of that the DS was playing dumb by telling me initially that those are the seats I ordered and I told him he is incorrect then he brought a service guy who confirmed that those are NOT the seats I have ordered.

 

[brianman]

I wonder about your use of the term "monopoly". Tesla holds 0.x% of the car market. They are anything but a monopoly.

I concur, but I think many on TMC (self included) sometimes consider Tesla vehicles in a class and market all their own.

 

[montauto]

I find it difficult to understand your posts. Is this suggesting that you are considering suing Tesla over this issue?

Why not?

The issue here is not whether I will sue Tesla or not ... It's about how they deal with their customers and specifically with me.

Also, I have to go to arbitration first, before we eventually reach the court.

All that is being determined, but again this is not the point. At the end I am the one who lost money, time and energy with Tesla dealings.

My time and energy lost I will not get back. At least I can try to get my money back and make sure no one ever get's the experience I had.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

Also, for the record, I didn't request $30k in liquidated damages if I don't get the Next Gen seats. The demand was that if Tesla is going to build another Model S P85D for me they should agree that if the car they're going to built, somehow doesn't match the specifications on the order they will agree to pay $30k. That was just a small assurance for me that Tesla will pay attention and built a Model S P85D exactly as ordered.

How exactly is this any better? Either one is completely ridiculous, and is more an indication of your tone/meaning/actions than any other tidbits of information you choose to share.

I can't believe I'm reading comments from people on this forum that are even remotely attempting to find justification in the OP's actions. The bottom line is that the OP is unreasonable, and has shown that he will go well beyond reason in order to get what he feels he deserves.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

There are two points in time in OPs story that make me cringe a little:

- The sales pitch and decision to buy the P85+ with claim no AWD is forthcoming
- Pushing / rushing of the P85D delivery signing to 2014 even though car was not yet deliverable/viewable

This story hinges A LOT on who is to blame here, because I guess the paper signing made things much more difficult for Tesla - paper-work wise - to reverse. Also the earlier P85+ episode affected things, I guess, for both the seller and buyer, on some level.

If the OP is fully to blame for both instances, I have much less sympathy for him - if he bought the P85+ knowing or should have known and was not pushed into it as he claims, and if the paper signing is on him as the counsel suggested, then I think that results in significantly less sympathy.

But of course, both points in time are also such that it isn't impossible to imagine there could be reasons outside of OP's control and he was acting in good faith in both instances, which on the opposite I think would lend him more sympathy.

So, so hard to say anything definite without all sides of the story. Unfortunately the sad part is, I don't find it hard to believe not even people inside Tesla deciding might not know all of it, but only some version quickly discovered through some process.

 

[Dutchie]

Now that I read the email, I do think that Tesla should have handled the case much better. If one wants a Model X because of the four wheel capability and someone talks him into a MS claiming that a four wheel drive is not in the works - and just weeks later finding out that there was one in the works - I would have an issue with that too.

Just pushing to sign the papers so Tesla can count them as a sale before year's end without having the customers priorities in mind is just not a wise thing to do.

btw, is that really Jerome's email address in the attachment?

 

[Canuck]

I think you should pay more attention when you read the letter ... I said the payments for the car are due. I didn't say I made the payment.

Were you financing the car or paying cash? When you said "my payments for the car I don't have are due" I assumed you were financing it. I don't see how that can be read any other way. I do pay attention.

What do you mean by "after being told" ? No one told me about any issues with the seats at all...

Your letter says Tesla told you: "Tesla will install them at some later date." I wrote "Then he refuses delivery after he signed, the paperwork was done, all by his own free will, and AFTER being told he will get the next generation seats."

I never commented on you discovering the issue. That was wrong on Tesla's part. If it was me, however, I would have liked to have got new seats later, and it's not a "material defect" that voids the contract, as others have suggested, but you got it rescinded in any event.

You have such negative and harsh words for Tesla yet you still want to own their product? That speaks volumes to me. I think you know in your own mind that you were not treated as poorly by them as you claim. If so, you would not want anything at all to do with them. Sure, they did you wrong, but you blew it all out of proportion and got stung back. No offence, but I actually applaud Tesla for that.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

How exactly is this any better? Either one is completely ridiculous, and is more an indication of your tone/meaning/actions than any other tidbits of information you choose to share.

I can't believe I'm reading comments from people on this forum that are even remotely attempting to find justification in the OP's actions. The bottom line is that the OP is unreasonable, and has shown that he will go well beyond reason in order to get what he feels he deserves.

Did you read OP's letter to Jerome? It is a few messages up as an attachment.

I didn't find that letter unreasonable. The events leading up seemed plausible.

But of course it is possible some other unreasonable communication happened somewhere.

 

[LakeForest]

I honestly don't understand the anger at Tesla over the release of the D. Sure, I would be disappointed too, but if I was to walk into the Apple store and ask if the iPhone was going to able to do x,y&z in the future I would have gotten the same response as you did from the salespeople--they know nothing in advance.

When you make a purchase, you make a transaction which is beneficial to both parties. Thus, by you choosing to buy the P85+ you believed you got more utility out of the car than the money. That does not change when a new product is released, and if you were not satisfied with the P85+ you would have not purchased it.

 

[NoMoGas]

Why not?

The issue here is not whether I will sue Tesla or not ... It's about how they deal with their customers and specifically with me.

Also, I have to go to arbitration first, before we eventually reach the court.

All that is being determined, but again this is not the point. At the end I am the one who lost money, time and energy with Tesla dealings.

My time and energy lost I will not get back. At least I can try to get my money back and make sure no one ever get's the experience I had.

Then take this piece of sound legal advice... SHUT UP AND DO IT. Trashing Tesla here is serving you no legal purpose (could be actually hurting you) and honestly, given most of our dealings with Tesla Motors (including negative issues) I find your story suspect at best. Sometimes things go wrong. We've all seen it. But you don't go after them with both barrels without expecting return fire. You calmly, and diplomatically explain the issue and from what I have seen Tesla Motors BENDS OVER BACKWARDS to make things right.

If that's not your experience, and you've been legally wronged, exercise your rights... but slandering Tesla here serves no purpose but to slander Tesla ... which seems to be your intent.

 

[Canuck]

Also, I have to go to arbitration first, before we eventually reach the court.

That's costly and if you lose you pay costs. I also think you have an uphill battle.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

You have such negative and harsh words for Tesla yet you still want to own their product? That speaks volumes to me. I think you know in your own mind that you were not treated as poorly by them as you claim. If so, you would not want anything at all to do with them. Sure, they did you wrong, but you blew it all out of proportion and got stung back. No offence, but I actually applaud Tesla for that.

I don't see how you can make that equation, though. OP has already admitted he thinks Tesla's products are great. That has not been at dispute. One can find the product great, while finding their own purchase experience disappointing. No?

The fact that a lot of people on TMC have applauded Tesla for this action, I mean seriously applauded them with apparent glee, I find extraordinary. I find it sad for all parties, mostly. I guess I just haven't been on TMC long enough.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

Did you read OP's letter to Jerome? It is a few messages up as an attachment.

Yes, the letter he is allowing us to see doesn't seem unreasonable. Other than the fact that he's making a big deal about signing the paperwork sight unseen...and was done for his financial benefit (tax credit), to which he clearly wanted since he decided to sign. However, that letter is clearly not the whole story.

But of course it is possible some other unreasonable communication happened somewhere.

I think this is pretty obviously the case. Which is why I bold-ed something I feel is unreasonable, which the OP seems to feel is "perfectly reasonable" (to use his own words).

 

[Canuck]

Then take this piece of sound legal advice... SHUT UP AND DO IT.

Ha! Actually, he should keep posting. It will assist Tesla with their defence.

 

[Johan]

Actually the letter is not that unreasonable. However the 30k figure seems to appear out of thin air.

Obviously there was some poor communication by Tesla (their achilles' heel as always). I also think this customer was likely less enthusiastic and more demanding than what they are dealing with on average - it goes to show how Tesla are transitioning from the early adapters, who will put up with all sorts of issues for the opportunity of driving a Tesla, to the more average high-end car buyers.

The thing that this thread is really about though is: Was it OK for Tesla to cancel his Model X reservation? Well, as a Tesla customer and share holder I think it was wise. This customer is obviously more demanding than average and he seems to be rather quick to go in to legal territory which, for Tesla, is just a waste of time and money seeing as there are thousands of others waiting behind him in line to buy a Model X. This is the reality of being production constrained rather than demand constrained - a rare situation for a company selling a product - they are actually in the priviliged position of being able to decline customers.

Also, very importantly, as has been noted by other this seems to be an extremely rare occurence, first we've ever heard of on this forum.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I honestly don't understand the anger at Tesla over the release of the D. Sure, I would be disappointed too, but if I was to walk into the Apple store and ask if the iPhone was going to able to do x,y&z in the future I would have gotten the same response as you did from the salespeople--they know nothing in advance.

When you make a purchase, you make a transaction which is beneficial to both parties. Thus, by you choosing to buy the P85+ you believed you got more utility out of the car than the money. That does not change when a new product is released, and if you were not satisfied with the P85+ you would have not purchased it.

In all fairness, Tesla had publicly made known plans of an AWD Model S by last year. I don't know if OPs account is correct, but I hope no Tesla sales-person has been saying AWD Model S is not up-coming.

That said, I don't think OPs issue with Tesla is with the P85+ in the end? It was with the P85D with wrong seats and refusing delivery? P85+ is backstory and of course affects state of mind.

- - - Updated - - -

Ha! Actually, he should keep posting. It will assist Tesla with their defence.

Why do you keep saying these things? Are you here to defend Tesla?