Tesla YANKED FSD option without notice - Class Action lawsuit? Any Lawyers here? [Resolved]

[PACEMD]

I'm taking the OP at his word as far as the timeline and order of events.
I have no idea how Tesla represented the car at auction. Only Tesla and the 3rd party dealer know that.
OP says that (correct me if I'm wrong) the dealer advertised it as with FSD and EAP, and that the car had those options enabled when he test drove it - after auction but before he purchased the car.
Perhaps at auction Tesla disclosed that these options would be removed. If that's the case, they should have been before the car was delivered to the dealer.
I'm not saying it's unlawful, (I am not lawyerly) but it feels very slimy and unnecessarily petty.

I don't believe the OP ever directly said the car was advertised by the seller as having EAP/FSD. If so I missed that and correct me, please. As I understood, it was felt to have EAP/FSD because of the existing software before update. And correct, we do not have enough information to say Tesla misrepresented the car at auction. Their sloppiness lead to misunderstandings, but that's a different thing.

 

[zimeon]

A AP2 car with navigate on autpilot (beta) and summon (beta) doesn't neccesserily mean it has FSD as well? Any way to check? Would the APPC and APFC codes reflect these options in some way?

 

[PACEMD]

So if Tesla allowed the car to arrive at and leave auction with 21" wheels, they would have a hard time swapping them for 19s after the auction because they did an audit. Why not same for other features installed at the time of auction sale.

Unless of course auction terms stated 'the specification of this car may change from how it is presented'.

This relates to contract between dealer and Tesla so OP will have to convince dealer to persue it somehow.

Well, that's the point of this discussion, isn't it? That licensed software presents a unique question.

 

[ucmndd]

A AP2 car with navigate on autpilot (beta) and summon (beta) doesn't neccesserily mean it has FSD as well?

Correct, because those features used to be part of the “enhanced autopilot” package that was sold when AP2 cars were new - not FSD.

 

[Battpower]

the dealer advertised it as with FSD and EAP,

The OP conjectures that the only evidence for fsd was the window sticker provided by Tesla after he already purchased the car. The only evidence before he purchased is photo of vehicle screen with at least EAP features. (that's right isn't it? Don't think I've seen any written spec from dealer to OP.)

Either way, OP has possible recourse only against 3rd party dealer, but nothing to stop OP helping dealer to persue Tesla.

 

[Battpower]

Well, that's the point of this discussion, isn't it? That licensed software presents a unique question.

Yes. And evidently one we can't answer but can (try to) understand better.

 

[Geek190]

On post #52 of this thread, OP Said

The 3rd party dealership advertised FSDC, I have pictures, screen shots and a disclosure report.
I would say they were caught by surprise as well. They stated that there's no so-called a vehicle condition report was present at the auction. (cannot guarantee that, but I tried to get it from the auction house and they couldn't locate it as well)

So I understood that he was buying this car not on assumptions but on assurances. I fully agree that his only recourse would be through the 3rd party dealer. It's unfortunate for the end user and this is really hurting Tesla's brand. It's completely avoidable by Tesla, but it appears that they are not concerned about their image much these days.

 

[PACEMD]

On post #52 of this thread, OP Said



So I understood that he was buying this car not on assumptions but on assurances. I fully agree that his only recourse would be through the 3rd party dealer. It's unfortunate for the end user and this is really hurting Tesla's brand. It's completely avoidable by Tesla, but it appears that they are not concerned about their image much these days.

Got it, thanks. If the third-party seller advertised the vehicle with FSD then it's their mistake. Go back to them........if you have that documentation.

 

[Battpower]

he was buying this car not on assumptions but on assurances.

Hard to remember all this. Don't think this (pictures of evidence) was posted was it? Not that it makes any difference to Tesla having sold a car then retrospectively removed significant and valuable features - by Tesla's own admission.

 

[Dutchie]

Tesla does not own the car and OP bought it from someone else. If Tesla takes away things from a car then there is a technical term for that and that is THEFT.

 

[2101Guy]

In my opinion, worth a shot on small claims court. Strong probability that Tesla won’t even show up at the hearing. Not worth their time or effort.

 

[Battpower]

In my opinion, worth a shot on small claims court. Strong probability that Tesla won’t even show up at the hearing. Not worth their time or effort.

But most likely action would have to be dealer against Tesla. Presumably OP would not need bring a case against the dealer except to force them to take action against Tesla.

 

[omarsultan]

When you buy FSD, do you click through any EULA or anything?

 

[Battpower]

When you buy FSD, do you click through any EULA or anything?

My car has HW3 and FSD and not aware of any license before use. Just usual disclaimers and instructions to keep hands on wheel etc.

 

[Uncle Paul]

Not sure you can sue an international public company in small claims court. If so, Tesla will most likely have a local manager represent their case.
Answer might be found in the software licensing agreement. Imagine that Tesla has the right to make any modification to software updates they see fit.

Might see more issues like these, as independent licensed dealerships sell products they know little about.

Maybe like selling an On-Star equipped Cadillac. They need to sign a fresh contract to get the onstar benefits of the previous owner.

 

[Az_Rael]

In my opinion, worth a shot on small claims court. Strong probability that Tesla won’t even show up at the hearing. Not worth their time or effort.

The OP said small claims limits in their state was $2500.

 

[Az_Rael]

Answer might be found in the software licensing agreement

I would love to see that. As far as I know, there is no such thing. Did you see a software agreement in any of your paperwork when you bought your car? I have bought three Teslas from Tesla and have not seen such a document.

 

[PACEMD]

I would love to see that. As far as I know, there is no such thing. Did you see a software agreement in any of your paperwork when you bought your car? I have bought three Teslas from Tesla and have not seen such a document.

I went back and looked earlier. I can find no documentation of software agreements. Nothing, nowhere, nada, not one line. Only that I bought and paid for Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Capability.

 

[israndy]

So what have we learned?

FUSC & FSD can be transferred to a new owner via private sale or trade-in as a used car where Tesla did not take ownership

More recent Free Supercharging goes away when you no longer own the car i.e. when ownership is transferred thru the Tesla app

Recently EAP, FSD & FUSC are reset when a car is traded into Tesla or comes off their lease. The trade-in is treated as a car with those valuable options so the original owner's investment isn't lost, but the car is then re-sold as though they never had those options. The new customer may add them, and this provides the full profit on those options to Tesla.

Sometimes Tesla has their cars not setup correctly in the system and periodic audits check these settings against their official record and they may be reset to the correct settings after the new owner has had some time with them.

The example was of the TM3s that came with FUSC that was not supposed to. This is inarguably a situation where Tesla should reclaim the correct settings and the owner who benefited should not be upset. Similarly, it can be understood that if the settings on this car were reset to no FSD and this is how the car sale was documented, Tesla should reclaim the correct settings there as well.

The pictures of the EAP instead of AP on the ad are the issue. It is understandable that a buyer would perceive these as indicative of the features of the car they are buying. But often used cars have pictures in their ads that enhance desirable features and do not display imperfections. We still do not know if the dealer made other representations that the car still had the EAP/FSD which the car was sold with when new. That is the only unclear item. If they did they should compensate the new owner, if they didn't the AS/IS clause is going to bite the new owner.

 

[swegman]

Can we all agree that if someone rooted a car and enabled features that were not paid for, such as, for example, to add EAP or FSD, and during an audit Tesla discovers the car has features activated that it should not have, that Tesla is entitled to remove those features?

What about if the rooted car having features added that were not paid for is then sold to an innocent non-Tesla dealer or innocent private party buyer, and after the car is titled in the name of the new owner, Tesla discovers during an audit that the configuration of the vehicle was altered. Would it be permissible for Tesla to change the configuration to remove the improperly (unauthorized) added features? Doing so would penalize the innocent non-Tesla dealer and/or private party buyer who may have paid a premium for the vehicle.

What if the non-Tesla dealer changed the configuration and then sold the car at a premium to the innocent private party buyer? Can Tesla come in and remove the features?

Things become complicated when software is involved that can be revised with relative ease. As more cars become available on the used market this is going to be an increasingly bigger issue. I’m not sure how one can protect themselves from buying a car having an unauthorized configuration that Tesla later changes except to buy directly from Tesla. And that may not even be enough if they don’t catch the unauthorized configuration before the used vehicle is sold.

Maybe Tesla!s solution is to do what they are doing; namely, remove all the value added features (EAP, FSD, FUSC, etc) from all resold vehicles and require the new owner to rebuy the features s/he wants. Not something I am thrilled about.