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

[Battpower]

car will loose FSDC and FUSC once the ownership has been transferred to 3rd party buyer

FUSC I had read about in a few places and I understood that with cars sold with lifetime free charging this will be stripped by Tesla and Tesla will also do the same on cars passing through other trade resale. That originally struck me as not unreasonable. As LFUSC was a bundled benefit with most or all cars at that time, it feels quite different to FSD / EAP paid option. Even though FSD as a paid upgrade to EAP really looked (and arguably still is) a line on an invoice and nothing more, it would be beyond sharp practice to retrospectively tell buyers that the intangible investment / purchase you just made for your car is not resalable.

Was it ever possible to buy as an upgrade LFUSC? Or was it only ever attached to certain cars?

 

[MS-Alec]

This thread is a hot mess. People are up in arms mad at Tesla for whatever reason and using this thread to post. There are issues that need to be resolved with Tesla's relations with the owner community and class action is good to make sure they don't forget an expensive issue, but saying that Tesla doesn't have the right to audit their cars to make sure they all have the features they were sold with is redonk

Following the Model 3 threads for about 4 years now I have seen LOTS of cars that magically had Free Supercharging at purchase. Owners were posting here asking why were they different. And eventually, they all got corrected and those individuals don't have it anymore. Tesla didn't come to them demanding payment for the Free charging they got, they just don't have it anymore.

Suggesting that a car's original Monroney sticker is inviolate is redonk too, unless there is a second sticker created for the used car sale there are zero reasons for Tesla to include software features from the original purchase after they have bought the car back. Reset to zero and let the customer add the features they want. This way the car can be sold cheaply but Tesla can continue to make money on it, just like they are doing with the acceleration upgrades they are now offering.

Now, this is ONLY if Telsa buys the car back, private sales should not be reset opportunities, and there needs to be communication between Tesla and auction buyers as to what features are enabled. But I find used car dealers are pathetic at selling Teslas and asking if they have EAP will be usually met with blank stares. This is why it is often worth buying directly from Tesla.

Since the used dealer is uneducated I can see going back to them for redress. "This car was sold with these features, now they are gone". This is where having a second Monroney for the used car sale would be useful.

I think people miss this important part - I have called to Tesla as their current customer (a couple weeks ago) and asked for the Monroney sticker and they sent me it, were EAP and FSDC clearly on it!
Tesla had every opportunity to remove it and modify the sticker before sending me but they didn't.
I think they remove FUSC- I was enjoying it within 3 weeks before a transfer occurred. I even called to confirm FUSC before the transfer and was told - yes, you have it.
I'm not complaining about that, since I have nothing in writing to prove them wrong, and letting it go.
FSDC-hell, no, I will not give up without a big battle.

 

[MS-Alec]

FUSC I had read about in a few places and I understood that with cars sold with lifetime free charging this will be stripped by Tesla and Tesla will also do the same on cars passing through other trade resale. That originally struck me as not unreasonable. As LFUSC was a bundled benefit with most or all cars at that time, it feels quite different to FSD / EAP paid option. Even though FSD as a paid upgrade to EAP really looked (and arguably still is) a line on an invoice and nothing more, it would be beyond sharp practice to retrospectively tell buyers that the intangible investment / purchase you just made for your car is not resalable.

Was it ever possible to buy as an upgrade LFUSC? Or was it only ever attached to certain cars?

Once again- Tesla does whatever they want. They changed several times policy on LFUSC! Today, it is not transferable, despite the fact the original owner paid, ir get it as incentive to buy car, etc. Next owner will not get it.

 

[Battpower]

as their current customer

Based on discussion here, this is an important point / question. In what way are you their customer?

There appear to be few and unsatisfactory legal mechanisms to deal with this. You physically have possession of the car and are presumably at liberty to destroy it and therefore do most anything else you might chose to do with it. The software is not as clear, as you most likely own a right to use the software subject to certain conditions.

This is a whole new dimension for car dealers to take into account. Getting the window sticker from Tesla doesn't necessarily form a contract with you even though you would reasonably think they have an obligation to provide factually correct information, especially as Tesla is the only trustworthy (!!) source of that information.

 

[Battpower]

Once again- Tesla does whatever they want. They changed several times policy on LFUSC! Today, it is not transferable, despite the fact the original owner paid, ir get it as incentive to buy car, etc. Next owner will not get it.

What? Not transferred even with private sale one private owner direct to another? Where did I get the idea that it was only through trade sales that this specific benefit would be stripped?

I think in several jurisdictions this would be completely illegal. So now Tesla owners have to become lawyers too?

Now I want / need to know how to be sure if the car I purchased with FSD as an integral feature of the car would retain that integral feature benefit for a future owner.

It was one thing to have paid for a car with an integral feature that I potentially didn't fully understand, but to then find out that this feature may or may not be a permanent feature of my car is beyond comprehension.

 

[mattwhite]

he recording statutes you refer to do nit require such recording before the sale occurs or even in the day of sale. Says recording merely needs to be done within a reasonable time period (obviously the sooner the better, and that is why one purchases title insurance to protect yourself in the event there is an issue with a clear title).

Recording can't happen before a sale by definition. And recording is not "required" in most states. It's a matter of priority of competing interests. And the exact rules differ from state to state. Texas (and other states) have what are known as "notice" recording statutes, meaning whoever gets their deed recorded first has priority (assuming the 2nd purchaser does not have actual notice of the 1st sale). There's no consideration of whether the time frame was "reasonable" or not, it's not a relevant issue.

In the present situation, it appears the car was auctioned on November 15 and 3 days later (November 18) an audit allegedly determined that the auctioned car was not eligible for FSD. That is not an unreasonable delay.

How can you say whether this is reasonable or not? There's a good argument that Tesla should have removed FSD prior to selling the car. If they had done so, this thread would not exist.

 

[MS-Alec]

Anyone here who purchased a car from Tesla, preferably used, can pull down their EULA? Is it even exist?

 

[Battpower]

Anyone here who purchased a car from Tesla, preferably used, can pull down their EULA? Is it even exist?

Where would one even find it? I downloaded every document I could find relating to two recent FSD MS CPO cars in UK and don't recall seeing any software licenses.

 

[MS-Alec]

Where would one even find it? I downloaded every document I could find relating to two recent FSD recent MS CPO cars in UK and don't recall seeing any software licenses.

This was my point - did Tesla ever create and supply EULA? Or they cannot figure that out since it was built on the open source platform and must be open it to anyone once a request is made!?

 

[linux-works]

I hope this gets defined better, soon.

if you buy fsd, is that value? persistent value? only for the 'lifetime' of ONE owner? what kind of logic is that?

I hope this goes to court. I REALLY hope it goes to court. it seems to need that, else we're just drifting at the whim of one powerful corporation.

what I suspect will happen: once more players are on the field and tesla has nothing special above the others (and I truly believe that's 5 years away, at most) - then they'll HAVE to compete or they'll lose sales to the competition.

right now, they are the only game in town for this kind of vehicle. they are abusing their position.

I hate bullies. I really hate bullies.

love my car. hating the company, more and more, each day ;(

 

[Vm.one]

You have to sue the third party dealership.

It's like someone selling you a hacked iPhone.

 

[dannycamps]

The fact that they have the legal right to remove (or even add) features once they obtain possession of the car from a prior owner doesn’t mean It is right.

Like others have said - not right for sure but borderline criminal to do it to a car that they do not have possession of.

Tesla has no relationship with the OP. The OP did not buy the car from Tesla but rather from a third party non-Tesla dealers. The legal relationship is between the OP and the non-Tesla dealer. That is why I asked what representations (if any) the non-Tesla dealer made and that if any representations were made, he should be seeking redress from that non-Tesla dealer and not Tesla.

So Elon builds a house and sells it to Tom with a 60" 4K TV in it. Then Tom moves and sells the house to me with the same TV in it. Soon after, Elon sneaks in and robs said TV. Based on your logic, I should go after Tom? How does that make sense?

 

[swegman]

The dealer claims he never seen any car condition report from auction house (Title didn't reflect any ownership of the auction house, so Tesla sold the car to 3rd party dealership, and he sold it to me)
The pictures show Summon and NoA, which are definitely indicate at least EAP.
Pictures were taken on 11/15 .
Dealership stated that they executed update a day before I picked up the car, and were under assumption it is a glitch on Tesla side) I realized it is gone after all sale docs were signed (a very simple sale contract and AS-IS note/release their responsibilities from any warranty)

Unfortunately, pictures showing Summon and NoA does not automatically translate as having FSD. Tesla has changed the feature set of their cars so many times I can’t keep up with it. At one time some features were standard with AP. Then they required that you get EAP to get features previously part of AP. Then they did the same for FSD. My model 3 has Summon and NoA which was part of EAP at the time of my purchase in 2018. Cars sold today have to buy FSD I believe to get those features. It tortures ones mind to know what features come with what package (AP, EAP, FSD) without knowing the date of manufacture of the car. This certainly contributes to issues with what features are on a car.

Showing it on the Monroney sheet is indicative of the car having FSD for the original purchaser ONLY. Once Tesla gets back possession of the car one can no longer rely on the Monroney sheet for the features of the car.

When you called Tesla for the Monroney sheet did you EXPRESSLY indicate to them that you were looking to buy the car or had just purchased the car from a non-Tesla dealer? Or did you just call Tesla and say you wanted a copy of the Monroney sheet? Did you EXPRESSLY tell Tesla you were buying (or bought) the car from. Non-Tesla dealer snd want to know the feature set on the car?

Im not trying to be hard on you. It’s just based on 7+ years dealing with a Tesla, I have learned it is necessary to ask very specific questions, and then verify the answers with at least 2 other Tesla representatives. Like with the IRS, if you ask the same question to Tesla 3 times, you are likely to get 3 different answers.

 

[linux-works]

Im not trying to be hard on you. It’s just based on 7+ years dealing with a Tesla, I have learned it is necessary to ask very specific questions, and then verify the answers with at least 2 other Tesla representatives.

I hereby rename the company of tesla to be "tesla, the oracle of delphi"

 

[swegman]

Like others have said - not right for sure but borderline criminal to do it to a car that they do not have possession of.



So Elon builds a house and sells it to Tom with a 60" 4K TV in it. Then Tom moves and sells the house to me with the same TV in it. Soon after, Elon sneaks in and robs said TV. Based on your logic, I should go after Tom? How does that make sense?

Legal fiduciary responsibility is between you and the seller (Tom) of the house. The legal fiduciary responsibility of Musk is with regard to the original buyer of the house. So you would have to sue the original buyer (Tom), who could then go after Musk.

 

[linux-works]

Legal fiduciary responsibility is between you and the seller (Tom) of the house. The legal fiduciary responsibility of Musk is with regard to the original buyer of the house. So you would have to sue the original buyer (Tom), who could then go after Musk.

can't you just sue them all, and have god sort it out?

(I'm kidding)

 

[MS-Alec]

love my car. hating the company, more and more, each day ;(

I can say the same, plus I hate the service.
Had a couple warranty issue, I have scheduled an appointment at a service center via the app. The service center is 120 miles away, just before my visit, I have noticed that one air strut leaks causing the car sinking overnight. I asked them to replace it as well while they have my car (I was provided a loner), but they refused since it was Not specified on the original appointment request! After I was told the repair will take overnight due to logs have to be pulled (initially they said 3 hours), I asked local manager to replace the strut and call me back once completed since I am going home anyway and will not be back within 2 days, he still refused! It took me a several calls to Tesla CS and my promise not go back until after the strut is replaced! 3 days later I picked up my car with everything fixed.
So, when the service center manager mentioned that Tesla is a luxury cars company I could not hold myself and laughed at him, saying I have not seen the worse treatment me as a customer another then Tesla, after owning BMW, MB, and Infiniti.

 

[thegruf]

just another , albeit minor, datapoint here.

Bought a 2017 P100D used inventory from Tesla from Tesla.
Never occurred to me that Tesla would change the spec from new.
Said it had Autopilot, that was fine for me, as FSD (such as it is) is of no real benefit on the roads I typically use.
Having previously owned an almost identical vehicle in age and spec, of course Autopilot to me meant EAP.

Er No.

Autopilot meant today's neutered spec of autopilot with no lane change, no parking and no summon.
Am I disappointed - yeah, a bit
Am I pissed with myself for expecting the car to be specc'd as new and not looking into every nuance of the wording - hell yeah.

The wider picture though is that Tesla messing around with the (software) features of used cars is an entirely new thing that the world has to get used to and that has never been the case for used cars before now, save perhaps a wheel change.

Anybody on this forum should know better, myself included, but the other 99% of owners out there havent a hope and will likely as not just end up disappointed ... for what ... a feature they are never going to pay for in future anyway, so Tesla are doing this in theory to "pull sales demand levers" but most probably are just ending up with disillusioned customers. Which frankly is just pointless. But this is the Tesla we have all come to love and ...

I used to love "demo'ing" my Tesla to any who showed an interest. Now I could give a stuff. Tesla quite probably several sales short of where they could have been, still they seem to be doing just fine. And that I guess makes the true point here

Great car, zero emissions, happy to drive it, but the company - well if other manufacturers would please give me some choice

 

[Battpower]

You have to sue the third party dealership.

It's like someone selling you a hacked iPhone.

But to do that you need proof directly in the name of the third party dealership that offered the car for sale with FSD. Trouble is, there are only two ways the dealer can know this. 1st because the car evidently has the feature because it is present on the car at that time. 2nd by contacting Tesla. Tesla may decline to provide the dealer with the information, or may give incorrect information, or the information given may not be valid shortly after it is given to the dealer.

In any event, it seems academic what Tesla says to the dealer unless there is some mechanism by which such information is legally binding.

In your example, how would one know for sure if an iPhone is hacked or not? Well, you'd think that checking with Apple would be a safe bet. But the only guarantee you can be sure has any substance is if you buy a phone from Apple that they warrant to be not hacked.

The issue with Tesla is more complex. The consumer protection laws for your jurisdiction are likely to be different from other owners.

These are new issues that are not well defined or regulated.

Legal structures are different between countries / states. Some hold the manufacturer responsible (at least for product liability) and others the reseller. This is why I could only buy from Tesla because in any other case it seemed far to risky. Even so, when I come to sell my car its value could be hugely effected by these factors.

 

[Silicon Desert]

I am more baffled by the fact that when something like this happens, the first thing that goes through a person's mind is sue sue sue, class action, where are the lawyers.