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

[doghousePVD]

None of the zillions of commenters nor the original poster have seen the documentation from the auction. The Mulroney sticker of the original sale had FSD, but that is irrelevant to a second sale. A car could have had an FM radio but was removed by the first owner. Or the tires we changed. The Mulroney sticker says nothing about the future sales.

All Tesla’s always have Autopilot. It can’t have been removed.

Enhanced Autopilot was an add on, as was FSD. Tesla had the car returned to them, removed the software options, then resold the car at auction. The purchaser at auction resold the car claiming ( fraudulently) that it had the software options.

Why is Tesla at fault because a jerk dealer misrepresented the car?

 

[DeanP]

None of the zillions of commenters nor the original poster have seen the documentation from the auction. The Mulroney sticker of the original sale had FSD, but that is irrelevant to a second sale. A car could have had an FM radio but was removed by the first owner. Or the tires we changed. The Mulroney sticker says nothing about the future sales.

All Tesla’s always have Autopilot. It can’t have been removed.

Enhanced Autopilot was an add on, as was FSD. Tesla had the car returned to them, removed the software options, then resold the car at auction. The purchaser at auction resold the car claiming ( fraudulently) that it had the software options.

Why is Tesla at fault because a jerk dealer misrepresented the car?

Was that what happened?

 

[Eno Deb]

None of the zillions of commenters nor the original poster have seen the documentation from the auction. The Mulroney sticker of the original sale had FSD, but that is irrelevant to a second sale. A car could have had an FM radio but was removed by the first owner.

Except that it is not possible for an owner to remove EAP and FSD. Only Tesla can do that.

All Tesla’s always have Autopilot. It can’t have been removed.

That is false for cars that were originally sold before March 2019.

Enhanced Autopilot was an add on, as was FSD. Tesla had the car returned to them, removed the software options, then resold the car at auction.

According to Jalopnik's documents they removed the options remotely after the auction.

 

[Litigate28]

The edit/update to the Jalopnik article is interesting. Copied here for convenience:

Updated: Friday, February 7, 2020, 1:27 p.m. ET:

The dealership, United Traders, reached out to me to add some details and more information about the sale of the Tesla and what they knew of its features at the time of the sale:

I saw the Tesla story blowing up on your website and a few others as well. We are the dealership (United Traders) that sold the Tesla to Alec B_____.

I bought that vehicle personally, and used the full self drive on it multiple times. It was working fine. One day, a random message popped up saying your autopilot has been upgraded after a software update. Then it disappeared. I figured it was a glitch. I already had an agreement with Alec to purchase the vehicle.

He did come and test drive it a few days later, and we both agreed it was a technical difficulty or bug that would be fixed by next software update. Since then Tesla has been of no assistance to him, and I have been doing my best to get him some help in this case.

I sell dozens of Teslas a year, and sold my father in law a Model X P90D with ludicrous speed package. 60 days after the purchase of the car, Tesla removed his ludicrous speed package. Upon complaints to them they said he never paid for it. We have video evidence and multiple pictures of the vehicle with it. They even removed the line under the P90D. I am still shocked at these acts.

It's interesting. I may ruffle some feathers here but I think Tesla retains the right to remove software that was never paid for. However, if Tesla sold the car at auction with the implication EAP/FSD was part of the car (or in the other case, Ludicrous) and received additional compensation for it (higher value), then Tesla would have some issues. Obviously if it was explicit then that's a very easy case. But again, that lies with the dealership and Tesla, not OP and Tesla.

I don't know how auctions work, is there a paper that identifies what options a car has from the seller to buyer? That disclosure statement is related to the buyback and not to the options on the car (or removal of the same). It is not very helpful.

 

[jlv1]

I bought that vehicle personally, and used the full self drive on it multiple times.

I paid for FSD and can't use it still. He didn't pay for it, and gets to use it ?

 

[MS-Alec]

The edit/update to the Jalopnik article is interesting. Copied here for convenience:

Updated: Friday, February 7, 2020, 1:27 p.m. ET:

The dealership, United Traders, reached out to me to add some details and more information about the sale of the Tesla and what they knew of its features at the time of the sale:

I saw the Tesla story blowing up on your website and a few others as well. We are the dealership (United Traders) that sold the Tesla to Alec B_____.

I bought that vehicle personally, and used the full self drive on it multiple times. It was working fine. One day, a random message popped up saying your autopilot has been upgraded after a software update. Then it disappeared. I figured it was a glitch. I already had an agreement with Alec to purchase the vehicle.

He did come and test drive it a few days later, and we both agreed it was a technical difficulty or bug that would be fixed by next software update. Since then Tesla has been of no assistance to him, and I have been doing my best to get him some help in this case.

I sell dozens of Teslas a year, and sold my father in law a Model X P90D with ludicrous speed package. 60 days after the purchase of the car, Tesla removed his ludicrous speed package. Upon complaints to them they said he never paid for it. We have video evidence and multiple pictures of the vehicle with it. They even removed the line under the P90D. I am still shocked at these acts.

It's interesting. I may ruffle some feathers here but I think Tesla retains the right to remove software that was never paid for. However, if Tesla sold the car at auction with the implication EAP/FSD was part of the car (or in the other case, Ludicrous) and received additional compensation for it (higher value), then Tesla would have some issues. Obviously if it was explicit then that's a very easy case. But again, that lies with the dealership and Tesla, not OP and Tesla.

I don't know how auctions work, is there a paper that identifies what options a car has from the seller to buyer? That disclosure statement is related to the buyback and not to the options on the car (or removal of the same). It is not very helpful.

The funny thing is- He was silent for a couple days when I asked for a resolution.

 

[Battpower]

He didn't pay for it, and gets to use it ?

Ha ha.

But you remind me of a question that keeps going through my mind. Several places in this thread there is mention of the concept of FSD having not been paid for by the current owner of the vehicle and this somehow being relevant with regards to their right of ownership. Especially when sold at auction, its hard to argue that parts of the car as offered for sale that are not expressly excluded, are in fact not included in the sale. We know that FSD is not a subscription, so the whole notion that it can be bought off Tesla then just disappear - only to reappear when purchased by a subsequent owner.

The same thing seems to apply to Ludicrous mode. If it has been purchased at some point in the past, then it should remain with the vehicle. The feeling this double-dipping by Tesla is nauseating.

 

[Battpower]

The funny thing is- He was silent for a couple days when I asked for a resolution.

Digestion time?

 

[Litigate28]

Ha ha.

But you remind me of a question that keeps going through my mind. Several places in this thread there is mention of the concept of FSD having not been paid for. For fully, having not been paid for by the current owner of the vehicle. We know that FSD is not a subscription, so the whole notion that it can be bought off Tesla then just disappear - only to reappear when purchased by a subsequent owner.

The same thing seems to apply to Ludicrous mode. If it has been purchased at some point in the past, then it should remain with the vehicle. The feeling this double-dipping by Tesla is nauseating.

I could be wrong, but I think in this case FSD may not have been paid for. Or in the quoted Ludicrous example above, again Ludicrous was not paid for. There was an extended timeframe where people were getting Ludicrous for free on inventory cars, and some reports of the same for EAP/FSD. The Monroney sticker is not always right since you can remove those software options when buying. I was given that opportunity on my inventory car, just decided to keep it.

 

[Battpower]

I could be wrong, but I think in this case FSD may not have been paid for. Or in the quoted Ludicrous example above, again Ludicrous was not paid for. There was an extended timeframe where people were getting Ludicrous for free on inventory cars, and some reports of the same for EAP/FSD. The Monroney sticker is not always right since you can remove those software options when buying. I was given that opportunity on my inventory car, just decided to keep it.

Agree, there may be slight doubt, although it sounds as though Tesla had more than enough chance to remedy any such oversite in this case.

It also seems to me that sale at auction demands additional vigilance on the part of the seller to not leave bundles of cash, gold, ashes of deceased loved ones or (potentially) unpaid software enhancements in the car unless specifically noted as excluded from the sale.

 

[doghousePVD]

Except that it is not possible for an owner to remove EAP and FSD. Only Tesla can do that.
That is false for cars that were originally sold before March 2019.
According to Jalopnik's documents they removed the options remotely after the auction.

Jalopnik is inaccurate. They don't have any documentation, just repeating a story by a rando. Jalopnick also hates Teslas.

 

[hill]

I paid for FSD and can't use it still. He didn't pay for it, and gets to use it ?

iirc -
folks began paying for it around 2016.
.

 

[Eno Deb]

Jalopnik is inaccurate. They don't have any documentation, just repeating a story by a rando. Jalopnick also hates Teslas.

I see pictures of documents in their article, which is more than what you have provided.

 

[MS-Alec]

Nonsense. Everything you said sounds correct but the problem here is Tesla didn’t strip the software when they had the car in their hands. They only stripped it after it passed through two subsequent owners — the third party dealership and the current, unhappy owner. I don’t like the fact they strip features on used cars in their inventory but believe they have the right to do so. However, that is not the case here — unless you know additional facts that Tesla in fact stripped the software when they owned the car??

This story is being poorly reported by the media to say the least. Let’s not add to the misinformation! Tesla is totally in the wrong and I bet they will reverse the decision even if we never hear about it.

I don’t know what steps the current owner went through to get relief but he/she should talk to the Regional Manager at a minimum. In the region encompassing AZ I have the Regional Manager in my Contacts and have had him intervene twice in my favor over the years. Raising hell online isn’t the first step to getting relief.

I have tried to get it resolved multiple times with service center manager, as well as called the UT customer center. Nothinv! "You are welcome to buy this option " was the answer.

 

[mystery]

its things like this that keep me from buying a tesla

i emailed them a couple simple questions, never received a response

it is clear they operate on the scheme of 80% (made up %) are happy who cares about the other 20%

it is clear elon has lied about FSD and its not yet delivered. everyone should be refunded that has paid for it. i have never paid a company to be a beta tester and have beta tested quite a bit of hardware and software over the years. some let me keep stuff for free as a thank you.

 

[banned-66611]

Seems like you need to take the car back to the dealer, and then the dealer can argue with Tesla over if it was sold to then with AP and FSD.

 

[azred]

its things like this that keep me from buying a tesla

i emailed them a couple simple questions, never received a response

it is clear they operate on the scheme of 80% (made up %) are happy who cares about the other 20%

it is clear elon has lied about FSD and its not yet delivered. everyone should be refunded that has paid for it. i have never paid a company to be a beta tester and have beta tested quite a bit of hardware and software over the years. some let me keep stuff for free as a thank you.

Why are you here if you aren’t planning to buy a Tesla? I hope you aren’t just another TSLA short taking a cheap shot but I can’t think of any other reason why you would be here. There are dozens of other car brands to please every taste, each with Internet discussion forums.

 

[dannycamps]

Picked up by Electrek:
https://electrek.co/2020/02/07/tesla-takes-away-autopilot-used-car-sold-dealer/

 

[Gu$ G]

Wow, as a fellow dealer that often buys Teslas at auction, I'm astonished by the experience and quotes from United Traders.

A vehicle sold at auction between dealers is supposed to be sold based on "fair and ethical treatment of both buyer and seller." You can read more about this policy, that applies to most auctions, in the NAAA Arbitration Policy (National Auto Auction Association).

Vehicles are bought and sold based on their present condition and feature set when they are passed through for sale. While some features can be listed in the "ad" that is rarely all inclusive and does not include AP or FSD unique to Tesla.

A specific announcement could be made to notify buyers of an unusual circumstance, or info that is fairly expected to be disclosed. For example, a Tesla could be sold with the announcement of "no autopilot" or "no FUSC" to tell buyers the car does not have a feature that you would otherwise expect, maybe because it is one Tesla intends to remove if Tesla is the seller.

Otherwise, the buyer will inspect the car and bid based on their perceived value for that car as it sits, with or without AP, for example. The sales price is absolutely based on that feature set, even if Tesla thinks the car sells for less than they want it to be worth!

Sellers offering Teslas at these auctions include both 3rd party dealers and Tesla themselves. I would suspect that all of the effected vehicle's having features removed are being offered directly from Tesla at these sales. Tesla is just removing the features far too late.

If Tesla had ownership of the car and wanted to remove features, that sounds reasonable to me. But that has to happen before the car is offered for sale. Otherwise, it's like trying to swap the rims on a car after it ran through the auction, just as a previous poster suggested. It's stealing. The vehicle is sold and Tesla can no longer claim ownership and make modifications.

At the very least this is very unethical, but I would offer it is also illegal. It should get them in very hot water with the auctions, at a minimum. A company like Tesla relies heavily on auction sales to move used inventory. Therefore, any effected dealers should be aggressively working with their auction reps to arbitrate and get some pressure on Tesla.

If the feature was never paid for, then MAYBE Tesla had the right to remove that feature from the original owner. I find that shaky ground alone. However, once the vehicle is resold to another buyer, that would be completely unfair to the try and remove the feature just because they're late to discover the problem. It shouldn't matter if the feature is software enabled or hardware, like selling a vehicle with the wrong rims.

 

[MS-Alec]

Picked up by Electrek:
Tesla takes away Autopilot from used Model S sold through dealer - Electrek

I was suprised as well, but later in the day since I guess they didn't want to be left behind
But if you noticed, electric worded their story very softly, almost "eah, no a big deal" Maybe not, but I fell this way.