Tesla Valet service goes POOF!!!

[AmpedRealtor]

Even though many people were talking about minor issues with theirs on the Consumer Reports posts, I still wasn't all too worried because of the Valet service. But, I am 150 miles from the nearest service center. That's really not making me feel comfortable about buying one now.

I'm 50 miles away, but any further and I wouldn't have bought this car.

 

[Max*]

So did it go "poof" or did it get decreased to 10 miles?

My service order from yesterday says "Valet Service Declined", which implies it didn't go "poof". I work about a mile from the service center, so it's no biggie to drop it off before work and pick it up after work.

 

[Andyw2100]

You should never buy a car if you are that far away from a service center. I'm 50 miles away, but any further and I wouldn't have bought this car.

I wouldn't have considered buying my Model S, but everything I read and everything I was told made it sound like Tesla would make the distance a non-issue, because they understood it was their responsibility. They understood that as a new company they would have to provide that level of service, or people would not purchase their cars. It made sense. At the time, I had no reason not to trust Tesla. I'm very sorry to say that is no longer the case.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

I wouldn't have considered buying my Model S, but everything I read and everything I was told made it sound like Tesla would make the distance a non-issue, because they understood it was their responsibility. They understood that as a new company they would have to provide that level of service, or people would not purchase their cars. It made sense. At the time, I had no reason not to trust Tesla. I'm very sorry to say that is no longer the case.

If I did buy a significant distance from service then I would not be happy with the changes Tesla has made. Perhaps OP should point out Tesla's inconsistencies to Tesla directly and demand that the previous valet policy be reinstated? At some point, someone is going to have to push Tesla's buttons if we want to get this back. Is OP willing to be that person?

 

[SW2Fiddler]

Isn't that what's called "bait and switch"?

Actually no.
Being steered to purchase a different product (the "switch" part) that is more profitable to sell than the advertised product (the "bait") that you came in to the store to buy, that is what's called "bait and switch."
The switch occurs before the purchase.
Tesla doesn't offer enough different products yet to even attempt bait & switch...

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Actually no.
Being steered to purchase a different product (the "switch" part) that is more profitable to sell than the advertised product (the "bait") that you came in to the store to buy, that is what's called "bait and switch." Tesla doesn't offer enough different products yet to even attempt bait & switch...

Okay, well then I guess it's just a lie. I was being generous.

 

[stopcrazypp]

It's very much an unethical move. Can someone smarter than me tell me how it's legal to sell a car based on a certain service promise, and then reverse course after purchase?

The thing is they didn't legally give a "service promise" (it was never in a contract anywhere, nor did the advertising say it would be available for the life of the car). The policy was a company-wide policy that was there at the time (and still around from anecdotes here, just with the mile limit lowered) and notably a *change* from a previous policy about Ranger service, which also was never put in writing in a contract anywhere (only exception is when you bought a service agreement). That is why I say any policy on the website that does not say it is going to be available for the life of the car (or some specified duration), should not be assumed to always be available, or you are setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

[SW2Fiddler]

Okay, well then I guess it's just a lie. I was being generous.

Bingo. Or "contract violation." Which is diagnosed by reading the Contract and verifying what is delivered...

 

[Andyw2100]

The thing is they didn't legally give a "service promise" (it was never in a contract anywhere, nor did the advertising say it would be available for the life of the car). The policy was a company-wide policy that was there at the time (and still around from anecdotes here, just with the mile limit lowered) and notably a *change* from a previous policy about Ranger service, which also was never put in writing in a contract anywhere (only exception is when you bought a service agreement). That is why I say any policy on the website that does not say it is going to be available for the life of the car, should not be assumed to always be available or you are setting yourself up for disappointment.

This just doesn't hold up for me.

For anyone who agrees with the argument above, how would you feel if tomorrow Tesla announced that they were shutting down all their service centers, and the only way to get service was to bring your car to Fremont, California? Would you be OK with that? Is there anything in your contract that states how many service centers at which locations Tesla must operate?

Tesla had a policy in effect that influenced our purchase decisions. They can't just change that policy without grandfathering in people who have already purchased. It just isn't right.

 

[JunesongProvisn]

I think not providing it for the $35k Model 3 is fine, but for people basically investing in the company by buying a six figure car, they should stick with the service as promised. It's part of WHY people love the Model S, that even when an issue does arise, Tesla takes care of them. That, to me, is part of makes it worth spending so much on a car.

If it's any consolation, you and I are basically neighbors and I spoke with the Charlotte service center today. They were very accommodating and got me an appointment on Tuesday, when I happen to be in town on business. If something substantial fails, I will definitely push for the $100 ranger service that I was promised. If not and everything is smooth sailing, why worry about it?

- - - Updated - - -

This just doesn't hold up for me.

For anyone who agrees with the argument above, how would you feel if tomorrow Tesla announced that they were shutting down all their service centers, and the only way to get service was to bring your car to Fremont, California? Would you be OK with that? Is there anything in your contract that states how many service centers at which locations Tesla must operate?

Tesla had a policy in effect that influenced our purchase decisions. They can't just change that policy without grandfathering in people who have already purchased. It just isn't right.

Would a petition get them to change it back for existing owners? Like others have said, it's one thing to discontinue it moving forward, but an entirely different thing to discontinue it for those of us who have purchased a car with that piece of mind.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

The thing is they didn't legally give a "service promise" (it was never in a contract anywhere, nor did the advertising say it would be available for the life of the car). The policy was a company-wide policy that was there at the time and notably a *change* from a previous policy about Ranger service, which also was never put in writing in a contract anywhere. That is why I say any policy on the website that does not say it is going to be available for the life of the car, should not be assumed to always be available or you are setting yourself up for disappointment.

It's a shame that Tesla can make a commitment on its web site that factors into a customer's purchase decision, but then can renege on this commitment because it's not in writing anywhere in a contract. How is that supposed to inspire confidence in the brand? Isn't part of Tesla's brand promise excellent service, and if so, how does this type of behavior promote such a promise?

 

[HankLloydRight]

This just doesn't hold up for me.
...
Tesla had a policy in effect that influenced our purchase decisions. They can't just change that policy without grandfathering in people who have already purchased. It just isn't right.

They've done it many times already, especially with "hardware upgrades" for people who bought the 4 or 8 year pre-paid service plan prior to Oct 26, 2014 when they changed their policy and now pretend that it never existed. "Hardware Upgrades" was the PRIMARY reason I bought the 8-year pre-paid service plan.

 

[ohmman]

It is possible that Tesla's internal intention is to continue to offer valet for their old customers. Despite telling me it won't be available to me anymore (I'm just a bit more than 10 miles away), they have provided it gratis on a few occasions. It sounds like this has been the experience of quite a few people, and I hope they continue the practice for those who need it. Personally, I can drive it in, but I'm close. For people who rely on the service due to SC distance or just the expectations going into the purchase, I think it is seriously unfair for Tesla to pull it out from under them.

I can't tell if the OP was denied Valet service. It would be worthwhile if people could post when they have been denied service so that we have actual data points for those who bought early with the expectations in place, but aren't getting what's delivered. If Tesla indeed plans to continue offering it, but is spreading the message it's going to be unavailable, that's just Tesla communication at its best.

<ot>Last note, this is my 1000th post. Whew! What an engaging and robust community we have here. Aside from the great work of Doug and the other mods, I appreciate that I can disagree strongly with a participant in one thread, and we can be completely on the same side in another thread. That variance in opinion makes for a stronger group, in my view. Very glad I can participate here! </ot>

 

[MikeBur]

First, I wanted to say "Thank You" to the OP for laying out facts, with research, and background of the criticism. It was a brave thing to do given the recent trends in attitudes of people here these days. I am hopeful that they have also raised this issue with Tesla corporate directly.

I still believe in Tesla and its mission, though am getting increasingly disappointed at the communication of changes - both positive and negative. It is becoming embarrassing compensating for the poor communications from Tesla and it saddens me that their most vocal and passionate advocates are not being given the tools to do this effectively.

For a company who depends on key influencers and early adopters, rather than marketing, it is incredibly risky to revisit 'policies' (written, legally-defensible, or web posts matters not) without helping the supporters understand and champion them.

Although most can understand the rationale for changes, the behavior of defending these hidden changes with comments along the lines of "it's not enforceable unless it's legally binding" is disappointing. There is precedent when people are continually challenged on the enforcement of statements that they believe their only recourse is legal.
Rather, should we not be ensuring we send the direct feedback and helping Tesla hold themselves accountable to their own, higher than rest of car industry, standards using data and being objective and constructively-critical?

Again, I want a Tesla to succeed and we need to hold them to their high standards. I still have my X on order, and will complete the Tesla family, though I have added caution to recent recommendations - none of these issues are related to the car, rather Tesla's communication and revisionist history approach to changing policies.

 

[Andyw2100]

They've done it many times already...

That doesn't make it any less wrong.

 

[HankLloydRight]

That doesn't make it any less wrong.

I'm not saying it is! Not at all. It's just a repeatable pattern that someday is really going to bite them in the ass in the form of a lawsuit or a class-action. And that's going to cost them 100x more goodwill than just "doing the right thing" in the first place.

 

[Andyw2100]

I'm not saying it is! Not at all.

I knew you weren't. I was just adding on to the point you were making.

It's just a repeatable pattern that someday is really going to bite them in the ass in the form of a lawsuit or a class-action. And that's going to cost them 100x more goodwill than just "doing the right thing" in the first place.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Electricfan]

By virtue of being the least bad, option 3 would be my choice. Incidentally, it is also the answer to the riddle.

That's right, you open the door of a $100,000 car using a rope!

View attachment 98982

I'm begging you, please make a video of you opening the door using that rope! It would make for a greater impact I think. Please link the video here for us to see.

 

[Doug_G]

MattOtt,

I also live in Ottawa, and have owned Tesla vehicles for five years now.

When I first purchased the Roadster, there were no service centers in Canada, though they had one service Ranger in Toronto. Ranger service was advertised as $1/mile. Tesla tried to charge me $1/km instead, but I successfully lobbied to have that reduced to a more reasonable number (fairly close to $1 US per mile with the exchange rate of the day). As it was I paid around $600 per visit.

Then Tesla opened a service center in Montreal. My ranger fees dropped in half.

After the launch of the Model S, Tesla introduced the flat $100 Ranger service. Wonderful! Even better, they offered a service plan, which for only $100 extra per year, included unlimited ranger/valet service. I bought the full eight years for my Model S. Later they removed that option (which means I am very unlikely to upgrade my Model S!).

So I got unlimited free valet/ranger service for the Model S, and $100 per visits for the Roadster. Very happy! Tesla tried to, whenever possible, chain different customer visits together for the Ranger so that their travel costs would be reasonable. I'm sure it was still a bit expensive for Tesla, but it worked. And it got people over the barrier of not having a local service center.

With recent changes, I still get unlimited free service for my Model S. Except that it's all valet service now; Tesla no longer wants to send Rangers out, so the valet has to make the round trip twice. That doubles the mileage cost. No doubt that is the reason for the greatly increased cost per mile.

I haven't had my Roadster serviced recently, but I sure hope I'm not back to paying nearly $600 a visit. It's really fortunate my Model S service is prepaid, because it has required 10X as much service as the Roadster (mine is a very early Model S - they have more issues).

One more very important point though... I was told in May of this year that Ottawa owners will not be charged a mileage fee. Now that Tesla is planning an Ottawa service center all owners will be treated as if they already had a service center.

I suggest you remind them of that promise and see what happens.

 

[stopcrazypp]

This just doesn't hold up for me.

For anyone who agrees with the argument above, how would you feel if tomorrow Tesla announced that they were shutting down all their service centers, and the only way to get service was to bring your car to Fremont, California? Would you be OK with that? Is there anything in your contract that states how many service centers at which locations Tesla must operate?

Tesla had a policy in effect that influenced our purchase decisions. They can't just change that policy without grandfathering in people who have already purchased. It just isn't right.

Legally they can do that. I don't think there is any precedence where a manufacturer has to maintain a minimal amount of service centers or is limited from shutting down service centers as necessary. Some states don't even let Tesla open service centers.

I'm not making a comment on what is "ethical" or "right" (which is a matter of opinion), but what is legal, since the comment I responded to said what Tesla is doing is illegal. I'm just saying Tesla did not violate any contract law with that policy change, given that policy was not explicitly tied to the vehicle purchase. They also did not violate advertising laws since they did not say the valet service will be available for the life of the vehicle (or some specified period), unlike their free supercharging policy for example.

I also note that the valet policy was also a *change* from a previous Ranger service policy of which they also offered no guarantees and just did it with an announcement. So it is within Tesla's rights to make that change (for better or worse).