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

[swegman]

No, I was not informed, I found out that by an accident when I was trying to set navigation to go home after I signed a very rudimentary, one-page sales contract. The dealer seems to be very surprised as well, and frantically searched the internet and found a couple of threads about sudden Summon and NoA disappearance, adding "it was here yesterday, before the update!"
Remember, I was a VERY excited, first time Tesla buyer, and as an IT professional a software glitch was sound very reasonable to me, so I believed him .

In post 121 above, you wrote “2. Mid-December I purchased the car from 3rd party dealership. The dealer stated the FSDC (@Battpower, Full Self Driving Capabilities) disappeared once he executed the software update jus a day before I took delivery (As he said -he did that as a good gesture (we wanted the best, you know the rest, right?) AND he cited the Tesla system glitch for this disappearance”. In this post (post 283, reprinted above), you state ”No, I was not informed, I found out that by an accident when I was trying to set navigation to go home after I signed a very rudimentary, one-page sales contract”. These two statements appear to be contradictory.

Post 121 states the update was before the delivery and the implication at least is the non-Tesla dealer said something before the delivery. The current post states you were not informed and found out by accident.

I am not giving you any legal advice, but I suggest you sit down, and very thoughtfully compose in writing the chain of events as to precisely what occurred and when they occurred before you even consider any legal action. I also suggest (again, I am not giving you any legal advice) that you refrain from further posting in this thread until you have concluded this matter, as this thread would be discoverable in the event of litigation.

 

[Battpower]

You have caught all the details preciously right! One of my complications in this adventure is this - the dealer is 3 states/800 miles away, so a face to face screaming session is unlikely at this point.

Screaming wouldn't help anyway. Just makes everyone feel bad and puts a solution further away. Fortunately, the distance is only a problem if you have to travel.

Being reasonable is no guarantee of satisfaction but it is your best chance often. As well as being ready to compromise even if you shouldn't have to.

How you paid for the car might make a difference. I wouldn't go into details here, but if you financed any of the payment that could be additional leverage.

 

[Battpower]

Sound like good non-advice to me from @swegman.

And a calm dialogue in writing with the dealer that non-contentiously gets the facts set out clearly would be very helpful to moving forwards. It can be more productive to do this by general (written) discussion that makes facts clear rather than directly firing off a list of statements and asking for the dealer to confirm they agree with them. Other than punishing the dealer, any solution that involves Tesla making good the suggested loss will involve bulletproof concise evidence.

Of course, just how I would approach if it was me in your shoes. You have to do what you think is best. Don't lose sight of the fact you still have a great car and will hopefully get loads of enjoyment driving it. I can say from my experience that there is a huge amount to enjoy that does not need EAP / FSD.

 

[BulldogsRus]

Most likely they'll just throw in a set of car mats and free oil changes, lol!

 

[MS-Alec]

In post 121 above, you wrote “2. Mid-December I purchased the car from 3rd party dealership. The dealer stated the FSDC (@Battpower, Full Self Driving Capabilities) disappeared once he executed the software update jus a day before I took delivery (As he said -he did that as a good gesture (we wanted the best, you know the rest, right?) AND he cited the Tesla system glitch for this disappearance”. In this post (post 283, reprinted above), you state ”No, I was not informed, I found out that by an accident when I was trying to set navigation to go home after I signed a very rudimentary, one-page sales contract”. These two statements appear to be contradictory.

Post 121 states the update was before the delivery and the implication at least is the non-Tesla dealer said something before the delivery. The current post states you were not informed and found out by accident.

I am not giving you any legal advice, but I suggest you sit down, and very thoughtfully compose in writing the chain of events as to precisely what occurred and when they occurred before you even consider any legal action. I also suggest (again, I am not giving you any legal advice) that you refrain from further posting in this thread until you have concluded this matter, as this thread would be discoverable in the event of litigation.

Thanks for the advice! I meant that the dealer told me "I did the update a day ago" - meaning a day before I took delivery, and he said this to me once we signed that "Bill of sale", and I discovered Summon and NoA disappearance.

 

[swegman]

Thanks for the advice! I meant that the dealer told me "I did the update a day ago" - meaning a day before I took delivery, and he said this to me once we signed that "Bill of sale", and I discovered Summon and NoA disappearance.

Not legal advice, just an observation.

 

[MS-Alec]

Had the OP inquired with Tesla as to why the features were gone, he may have been told the features were intentionally removed per Tesla’s policy. He could then have made an informed decision whether to still buy that car or look for another car.

Tesla will not discuss with non-owners anything, citing a confidentiality agreement.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

If you go through this long thread, you will see that Tesla downgraded the features of the car while it was still owned by the non-Tesla dealer (that is, after the OP said he examined the car but before he signed the purchase papers and paid for the car).

The OP says the non-Tesla dealer updated the firmware before he executed the purchase documents, noted that Summon and NoA had disappeared and told the OP that it must be a glitch. Assuming all this is correct and the non-Tesla dealer truly believed the car to properly have EAP and FSD (that is, there was no reason for the non-Tesla dealer to think otherwise), it should have raised a red flag for the non-Tesla dealer to investigate and not brush it off. Further, when the OP was told the features had disappeared by the non-Tesla dealer, he should not have completed the transaction (execute purchase documents and pay for the car) without at least making his own investigation and not relying on an assertion by the non-Tesla dealer that it was likely a glitch. There were at least two points in time where the matter could have been looked into before completing the purchase, which could have prevented the situation the OP is in now.

I am not discussing whether Tesla is right or wrong to have removed features when this particular car was owned by the non-Tesla dealer (that being the point in time the action by Tesla occurred according to the OP), but that a little due diligence could have avoided the present situation. Had the OP inquired with Tesla as to why the features were gone, he may have been told the features were intentionally removed per Tesla’s policy. He could then have made an informed decision whether to still buy that car or look for another car.

I believe your premise to be incorrect.

Tesla has a history of being very tight-lipped about cars that are NOT owned by someone making an inquiry. The OP would not have been told anything about this car prior to purchase, most likely.

Thus, Tesla's actions remain improper. Someone paid for FSD, or at least the car "thought" that was the case.

Tesla removed FSD after-the-fact and should not have done so.

 

[jumpingsheep]

Yea this sounds like the heart of the software ownership battle that has raged on devices. Companies are trying to make it so that software on a device is a "rental" giving them the right to disable a device to stop any 2nd hand sales. In Europe, several companies including video game companies have lost that fight already. Europe essentially stated that when software is purchased, it is owned and must be made transferable. In the US, it has basically been (wrongly) ignored and should have already been address by a supreme court.

One thing is for certain. Yesterday I almost bought a tesla. today, after reading all these posts here, there is no way I am going to do so and I am also going to cancel the cyber truck pre-order.

 

[Battpower]

Yea this sounds like the heart of the software ownership battle that has raged on devices. Companies are trying to make it so that software on a device is a "rental" giving them the right to disable a device to stop any 2nd hand sales. In Europe, several companies including video game companies have lost that fight already. Europe essentially stated that when software is purchased, it is owned and must be made transferable. In the US, it has basically been (wrongly) ignored and should have already been address by a supreme court.

One thing is for certain. Yesterday I almost bought a tesla. today, after reading all these posts here, there is no way I am going to do so and I am also going to cancel the cyber truck pre-order.

I agree that using software to effectively destroy the value of hardware is a huge problem. Its one thing to take advantage of new hardware features to deliver a previously impossible level of performance, but something totally unacceptable to neglect and intentionally negate remaining value in older hardware. Worse, to effectively disable hardware on some tentative argument of obsolescence is just wrong.

However, I would not see this thread as a reason to not buy Tesla. For all the potential issues highlighted and hypothesised here, there really isn't anything unique to Tesla. Tesla are well ahead of the curve or on a completely different curve from other manufactures. IMO most issues faced by Tesla are no different to those just starting to sell EVs except that Tesla have been pushing the envelope since 2012 and earlier if you count the Roadster. The OP hasn't, as far as I can tell, finished (or may be even started) perusing a resolution, and HIS case doesn't even look as though it's against Tesla.IIf anything this thread shows just how vigilant you need to be, and also that in the current state of things, buying from Tesla direct is a safer bet (but don't be any less vigilant!)

If you want a reason to not buy a Tesla, there are plenty of possibilities like poor communication, lack of dealer network, use of OTA updates, suspect electronics in some cars. But for me, all brands have their (significant) weak points, and the Model S is still a great car.

 

[Gixx1300R]

Yea this sounds like the heart of the software ownership battle that has raged on devices. Companies are trying to make it so that software on a device is a "rental" giving them the right to disable a device to stop any 2nd hand sales. In Europe, several companies including video game companies have lost that fight already. Europe essentially stated that when software is purchased, it is owned and must be made transferable. In the US, it has basically been (wrongly) ignored and should have already been address by a supreme court.

One thing is for certain. Yesterday I almost bought a tesla. today, after reading all these posts here, there is no way I am going to do so and I am also going to cancel the cyber truck pre-order.

Farmers when through the software battle with John Deere

Farmers can’t legally fix their own John Deere tractors due to copyright laws

 

[phaphaphooey]

Not legal advice, just an observation.

Your local BPR may not agree.

(Just joking I think you have gotten your point across and are clear from any BPR perspective. This is not legal advice to you btw)

 

[Alset4S]

I stated that it's my understanding that unlimited supercharging and EAP/FSD typically don't transfer through third-party sales. Not that I had definitive evidence of EAP/FSD never transferring, and in particular I mentioned this may be different with private sales. That understanding comes from reading the TMC forum. But answer that question for yourself as you are able. Let us know if you find evidence of EAP/FSD being routinely maintained with third-party sales. A poster above stated EAP transferred with their used purchase but did not mention from whom he bought the vehicle. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, just that It's my understanding that generally not.

I don't know what would happen today but in November I purchased a 2016 75D MCU1 AP2 model S from a third party dealer. Original owner bought and paid for EAP and FSD as show on monroney sticker. The car also had FUSC.
All the above have transferred to me and are fully functional with all capabilities released todate.
I've been told by SC that I'm eligible for the free FSDC(full self driving computer) upgrade and will be notified when my VIN is scheduled.(fingers crossed)

 

[PACEMD]

I don't know what would happen today but in November I purchased a 2016 75D MCU1 AP2 model S from a third party dealer. Original owner bought and paid for EAP and FSD as show on monroney sticker. The car also had FUSC.
All the above have transferred to me and are fully functional with all capabilities released todate.
I've been told by SC that I'm eligible for the free FSDC(full self driving computer) upgrade and will be notified when my VIN is scheduled.(fingers crossed)

Interesting, thanks for adding that.........

 

[ucmndd]

Those two outlets are basically State Media for Tesla. They're not going to bite the hand that feeds.

You need to take this somewhere that's already on Tesla's bad side, like Jalopnik. They'd be much more likely to write a snarky article exposing your situation

Told ya so.

Tesla Remotely Removes Autopilot Features From Customer's Used Tesla Without Any Notice

 

[Purity999]

Similar thing happened to me, except with a used Model 3. I purchased a used Model 3 from a non Tesla Dealer in April 2019, and it was equipped Enhanced Auto Pilot at the time I purchased the vehicle. First weekend of September, right before the big V10 push, everything disappeared mid trip while I was supercharging. Long story short, Tesla support told me tough *sugar* even though it was there when I purchased the car. I even received an e-mail stating, as an owner of EAP, upgrade to FSD for $3,000. They told me the dealer or myself, should have called Tesla to verify the software was supposed to be there. How the hell was I supposed to know that? They sent me the original bill of sale and only Autopilot was purchased. I'm still pissed. They said it was a demo feature and it should have been disabled after the original owner purchased the vehicle. So I asked why wasn't it turned off, they didn't have an answer for me. I told them if it wouldn't of had EAP, I would have purchased one of the other Model 3's I was looking at that did...

 

[Purity999]

In every single one of my emails, I kept asking 3 questions. They never answered a single question...

1. If the original buyer never purchased EAP/FSD, why were the features enabled in this vehicle?
2. As a potential buyer looking a used Tesla, other than checking the vehicle software, how else would I verify EAP/FSD?
3. Why would I receive an email from Tesla stating I was an EAP owner asking me to upgrade to FSD if this wasn't the case?

 

[ucmndd]

The more I re-read the facts in this case and others, the more my opinion shifts to “eff Tesla” and their heavy-handed money grabbing bullshit. This is bad all around - the sort of shady sugar that ends up causing regulators and legislators to sit up and take notice.

Y’all should twit the story links at Lord Elon now that it’s becoming mainstream news (The Verge and others picked up the Jalopnik story and ran with it).

 

[Battpower]

The more I re-read the facts in this case and others, the more my opinion shifts to “eff Tesla” and their heavy-handed money grabbing bullshit. This is bad all around - the sort of shady sugar that ends up causing regulators and legislators to sit up and take notice.

Y’all should twit the story links at Lord Elon now that it’s becoming mainstream news (The Verge and others picked up the Jalopnik story and ran with it).

Reading the Jalopnik story makes it really clear why this is unacceptable on several levels - both the simple 'they stole part of the car after they sold it' through many more levels to 'just whose car is it?' and 'what is my on going contractual relationship with Tesla?'.

The latter point is maybe slightly clearer if you buy a car directly from Tesla (but not much!) because at least you have a purchase agreement directly with them. But when you buy from one place (such as a 3rd party dealer) with an open tunnel for Tesla to come and strip your car whenever their rule book says it is appropriate, it makes it super messy because Tesla can claim that any error is on the part of the dealer. And your purchase was made from the dealer.

This really has to be sorted out. The notion of Tesla 'double dipping' is especially unpalatable. Not only does FSD currently do little if anything more than EAP, but Tesla can strip off one or both already included (incomplete) features and sell them again to a subsequent owner.

Not only double dipping, but 'having their cake and eating it' is just a plain cash grab when Tesla say (if it's suits them) that these same features (particularly FSD) can't be removed from a car prior to purchase if not wanted by the new owner.

 

[tuoncan]

Could it be that the dealer bought the car and did not have FSD paid for but advertised it has FSD because Tesla made an error and give the car FSD when it shouldn't?
Can you ask the dealer to show what they paid for when they bought the car from Tesla?