NerdUno
Member
Yep. And the lawyers caved to make a quick million.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Settles Class Action on AP2.0 Delays
- Thread starter croman
- Start date
They settled for interest costs without noting that cars have a limited lifespan.
First you must assign a useful lifespan. Say 11.5 years (IIHS).
Now the duration without the asset goes into that. This is a loss also PLUS interest.
So up to 8.7% (duration of lifespan) + ~5% (interest delay of settlement) = up to $685 dollar of true loss.
That should have been the minimum starting point for negotiations which is the actual loss not including loss of enjoyment of the feature.
I'm going with both greedy and stupid for the legal team representing the class. Just stupid for the judge if he accepts it.
Totally agree with@McRat on this one.
Being Canadian, my settlement amount is $0.
I didn’t buy FSD because I didn’t believe it would be available before I traded in my car. Didn’t think that would apply to EAP.
Other than that, the car is awesome. Tesla should just refund everyone and let us decide whether to repurchase when they have something to sell.
Being Canadian, my settlement amount is $0.
I didn’t buy FSD because I didn’t believe it would be available before I traded in my car. Didn’t think that would apply to EAP.
Other than that, the car is awesome. Tesla should just refund everyone and let us decide whether to repurchase when they have something to sell.
Nonsense, it is a settlement, not a finding of guilty.
If it were an easy case, the complaint would not be settled, it would go to trial.
Tesla settled because it was expedient.
The lawyers settled because winning wasn't a sure thing. Better a bird in the hand than two in the bush.
Tesla got a smoking deal. Kudos to their legal staff.
The plaintiff lawyers most likely settled because they didn't have to do much work, work for very long, and got a killer payday per hour. They settled the class for under 1/2 the true loss per standard accounting methods. This is sadly very common in class actions. Grab a quick buck is the goal, not represent your client's best interests or true losses.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
Interesting calculation based on 5% interest ... why does the payment phase out in September 2017 with features still missing?
Autopilot 2.0 still doesn’t have many of the features promised in the EAP package, like On-ramp to Off-ramp and Smart Summon.
Interesting calculation based on 5% interest ... why does the payment phase out in September 2017 with features still missing?
Autopilot 2.0 still doesn’t have many of the features promised in the EAP package, like On-ramp to Off-ramp and Smart Summon.
They offered nothing for enjoyment of the purchase. I assume this is the major reason for the purchase to begin with. The more features that are missing, the less enjoyment.
Cut off is likely due to ap2.5 hardware. That seems troubling. Terms of the settlement will be very key. Waiver of any and all claims, known it unknown, would be too broad and unacceptable to me. I'd rather forgo the payment and hold Tesla accountable as long as my legal window is open.
To be clear on this wasteful litigation:
1. The plaintifs did not win a class certification
2. The plaintiffs didn't survive a motion to dismiss.
The P attys only filed two complaints -- which Tesla never even answered. Instead they went right to mediation and ended up here. The merits were never actually explored and the lawyers on both sides did relatively little. Except Tesla paid the extortion fee of a $1 million to the Plaintiff counsel and a few hundred thousand will be collected as nickels as dimes to the AP2 buyers who would have a very tough time proving damages now with AP2 rocking.
And by the way, because one plaintiff dropped out, we have the current status documented in a court filing.
1. The plaintifs did not win a class certification
2. The plaintiffs didn't survive a motion to dismiss.
The P attys only filed two complaints -- which Tesla never even answered. Instead they went right to mediation and ended up here. The merits were never actually explored and the lawyers on both sides did relatively little. Except Tesla paid the extortion fee of a $1 million to the Plaintiff counsel and a few hundred thousand will be collected as nickels as dimes to the AP2 buyers who would have a very tough time proving damages now with AP2 rocking.
And by the way, because one plaintiff dropped out, we have the current status documented in a court filing.
Uncle Paul
Well-Known Member
While this is an emotional issue to many Tesla owners, it looks like it was simply another business deal for the law firm.
They saw an opportunity to extort some easy money from Tesla and went for it. No real interest for the owners, but just to get maximum pay off for their legal action.
My viewpoint is different than many others. I am amazed at the improvements in the driver assistance system built into my 2017 Model X. It has enjoyed several updates, at no cost to me, making the self driving capabilities far better than when I took delivery (January 2017).
It makes long distance travel much more relaxing, gives me additional safety features, and really comes in handy for heavy traffic commuting.
Best use for many would be to use the bonus to go towards a share of stock. Could be worth a lot of money someday.
I realize that Tesla's Full Self Driving program took a huge step backwards when they split up with Mobile Eye. I understand that their partnership played a big part in Elon's predictions. When it dissolved Tesla need to go back to square one, and develop their own auto pilot in house. They choose to take the long view, and integrate the sensors into all their cars, so that when the software would catch up, it would be easier to integrate it into the vehicle of their current customers.
That decision has significant added value for current owners, who's Tesla's most certaintly maintain a higher used car value, due to their ability to continue to be upgraded as the software becomes available.
They saw an opportunity to extort some easy money from Tesla and went for it. No real interest for the owners, but just to get maximum pay off for their legal action.
My viewpoint is different than many others. I am amazed at the improvements in the driver assistance system built into my 2017 Model X. It has enjoyed several updates, at no cost to me, making the self driving capabilities far better than when I took delivery (January 2017).
It makes long distance travel much more relaxing, gives me additional safety features, and really comes in handy for heavy traffic commuting.
Best use for many would be to use the bonus to go towards a share of stock. Could be worth a lot of money someday.
I realize that Tesla's Full Self Driving program took a huge step backwards when they split up with Mobile Eye. I understand that their partnership played a big part in Elon's predictions. When it dissolved Tesla need to go back to square one, and develop their own auto pilot in house. They choose to take the long view, and integrate the sensors into all their cars, so that when the software would catch up, it would be easier to integrate it into the vehicle of their current customers.
That decision has significant added value for current owners, who's Tesla's most certaintly maintain a higher used car value, due to their ability to continue to be upgraded as the software becomes available.
lunitiks
Cool James & Black Teacher
At first glance yes, but isn’t the class limited to buyers of the 2.0 hw? That should be the reason perhaps
did not Tesla voluntarily repurchase your car as a regular sale? If so you might be eligible on your previous car (similarly to eligibility for the tax credit and such).
TaoJones
Beyond Driven
Tesla is getting off cheap here.
There was a lot of misinformation put forth by Tesla in that timeframe - from the staged video to the “now you don’t have supercharging and now you do” games last Spring that affected 100 vs 90 buying decisions. This (E)AP misrepresentation is just one concern.
Don’t be surprised if more class actions materialize - and perhaps with better lawyering on the part of the plaintiffs - which would not be difficult it appears.
Evidently, I stand to get $200 back if I choose to take the money. Woo hoo. A tire. Not including mounting, balancing, environmental and disposal fees, or tax.
As with most class actions, I remain decidedly... underwhelmed.
Other than for the potential of precedent.
There was a lot of misinformation put forth by Tesla in that timeframe - from the staged video to the “now you don’t have supercharging and now you do” games last Spring that affected 100 vs 90 buying decisions. This (E)AP misrepresentation is just one concern.
Don’t be surprised if more class actions materialize - and perhaps with better lawyering on the part of the plaintiffs - which would not be difficult it appears.
Evidently, I stand to get $200 back if I choose to take the money. Woo hoo. A tire. Not including mounting, balancing, environmental and disposal fees, or tax.
As with most class actions, I remain decidedly... underwhelmed.
Other than for the potential of precedent.
Honestly I haven't read the complaints filed but as noted no class was certified. I think that hw2.5 wasn't pled in the amended complaint, but I'm not sure.
You are a very forgiving owner who is happy that in April 2018 you are now enjoying some of the features that were advertised as being available in January 2017 and that you paid for in January 2017.
Interesting calculation based on 5% interest ... why does the payment phase out in September 2017 with features still missing?
Autopilot 2.0 still doesn’t have many of the features promised in the EAP package, like On-ramp to Off-ramp and Smart Summon.
What information is contained in the "Class members who purchased prior to January 24, 2017" from the Feb-2017 column onward?
Similar threads
- Article
