[uk] UltraSonic Sensors removal/TV replacement performance

[kingjohno]

The interesting thing I would speculate on in UK law is how much the prompt for 'agreement for delivery without USS' was made under duress.

I think the point is mute if a viable replacement with Vision is here within 3-6 months, but if not, I believe it will clearly lead to claims. 'I'd already sold my car', 'didn't have a choice but to accept', 'car prices had gone up 10% since I reserved' etc. etc.

 

[Mullermn]

The interesting thing I would speculate on in UK law is how much the prompt for 'agreement for delivery without USS' was made under duress.

I think the point is mute if a viable replacement with Vision is here within 3-6 months, but if not, I believe it will clearly lead to claims. 'I'd already sold my car', 'didn't have a choice but to accept', 'car prices had gone up 10% since I reserved' etc. etc.

I agree. Consumer law is pretty good in the UK and I think we’ll have a strong chance of getting restitution either on the basis that the last minute change to the contract was unfair or on the basis that Tesla promised a replacement function ‘soon’, and I bet there is precedent for a reasonable interpretation of ‘soon’.

I will also be interested to see what happens if Tesla roll out a TV equivalent that is not of the same standard as the USS function. There was nothing in the disclaimer that said the new function could be any less effective than the old one.

I am cautiously optimistic that the TV replacement may be better than USS but if not I’ll be joining the queue to get Tesla kicked in to line.

 

[Danzr]

The interesting thing I would speculate on in UK law is how much the prompt for 'agreement for delivery without USS' was made under duress.

I think the point is mute if a viable replacement with Vision is here within 3-6 months, but if not, I believe it will clearly lead to claims. 'I'd already sold my car', 'didn't have a choice but to accept', 'car prices had gone up 10% since I reserved' etc. etc.

I’d already sold my car / price changes are totally
immaterial and moot.

Tesla’s terms say they can change the vehicle and must let you know if it’s a ‘material change’ Given they did let us know and we had a choice to continue or accept with awareness that the car comes without sensors but functionality should be restored soon.

The only thing to challenge/debate is when we get it and how functionally similar it is to the previous version as in is it equivalent.

People have a weird grasp of consumer law, it protects you from unfair terms but if you knowingly accept a vehicle without USS and then outside of the right to reject decide to start a legal complaint against Tesla for lost functionality you can’t base that on unfair contract terms/not reading them because they were long.

You have to base it on the revised terms which falls back to what I’m saying above - did they deliver on the revised promise - did we get it soon and it is equivalent.

My argument is a vehicle eligable for 4/5 years worth of updates you should expect soon to be within 6 months.

 

[Boza]

Is this a material change, as defined by a reasonable person? Probably. You have a well established and adopted approach to widely available, industry standard functionality replacement with a proposed, unproven approach.

How long does it take for a reasonable person to realize that the change is material? I would argue rather quickly, within a few days/weeks of delivery, but certainly more than a few hours/miles. Probably have a case that one needs to use the car a bit to realize.

Is there evidence of efforts to cure and what is the reasonable expectation of time to cure? Two aspects of this. On the surface, one would argue that Tesla knew at least 6 months ago that they would stop delivering that functionality and in the last 6 months there is little outside evidence they put efforts into cure. The firmwares they issued do not even have evidence for attempt in that. This will probably require evidence of internal documents (plans, code) and discussions. The seconds aspect is about if such cure is possible, within reasonable timeframe, with their approach. That would require experts and will quickly become very expensive to argue.

The answers to those questions are certainly not clear cut and they are, at least, worth pursuing in the legal space.

On the other hand, interesting things are happening at Twitter that may have positive effect on this whole thing, albeit not immediately.

 

[Danzr]

Is this a material change, as defined by a reasonable person? Probably. You have a well established and adopted approach to widely available, industry standard functionality replacement with a proposed, unproven approach.

How long does it take for a reasonable person to realize that the change is material? I would argue rather quickly, within a few days/weeks of delivery, but certainly more than a few hours/miles. Probably have a case that one needs to use the car a bit to realize.

Is there evidence of efforts to cure and what is the reasonable expectation of time to cure? Two aspects of this. On the surface, one would argue that Tesla knew at least 6 months ago that they would stop delivering that functionality and in the last 6 months there is little outside evidence they put efforts into cure. The firmwares they issued do not even have evidence for attempt in that. This will probably require evidence of internal documents (plans, code) and discussions. The seconds aspect is about if such cure is possible, within reasonable timeframe, with their approach. That would require experts and will quickly become very expensive to argue.

The answers to those questions are certainly not clear cut and they are, at least, worth pursuing in the legal space.

On the other hand, interesting things are happening at Twitter that may have positive effect on this whole thing, albeit not immediately.

100% agree my argument is with the people claiming that they could argue they were made to accept a vehicle with no USS under duress…

We know that some people had the prompt to accept - some haven’t - we don’t know if those are lease orders or orders made after the changes were announced but it appears Tesla consider it a material change as they told us about it.

The rules on cancellation from both sides are very clearly explained in the order agreement.

If you don’t like it, cancel your order Karen. Based on the amount of inventory it looks like quite a lot have reconsidered for this or economic reasons.

If you decide to proceed with the order knowing you don’t have USS your only argument becomes how soon is ‘soon’ for the restoration of the functionality and what is consider ‘equivalent functionality’.

 

[Whyone]

.....

For those that ordered before the removal was announced and didn’t get them and weren’t told, did you lease etc or did you buy?

Personal cash purchase, no third parties involved anywhere.

 

[adasko]

PCP purchase no messages to accept car without USS. Order placed in May. I figure out my car will come without USS high vin 689...
Just drove it second time since collecting it and parking at supermarket with dirty reversing camera is crap.
For everyone with comments to learn parking will add I'am lorry driver and know how to park.

 

[Boza]

I got FSD when I ordered back in 2020 but having a real FSD (whatever that means) was not important for me - whether it happens or not. Given Tesla’s track record I would have never bought on a promise for something important like USS and would have cancelled delivery albeit that would have been painful. Don’t forget that now we have alternatives and more are coming. Tesla is not the only game in town anymore.

 

[Xoảiance]

PCP purchase no messages to accept car without USS. Order placed in May. I figure out my car will come without USS high vin 689...
Just drove it second time since collecting it and parking at supermarket with dirty reversing camera is crap.
For everyone with comments to learn parking will add I'am lorry driver and know how to park.

You're right. In urban environments with very small parking spaces, the uss sensor will help a lot

 

[Zilla91]

Good question. I don’t know, I’ll report back the next time I’m out

@MrBadger to answer your question; no it didn’t - which I found a bit odd because the side camera could definitely see it

It was night time though so that might have played a part

 

[H43lio]

Add me to the list of people who weren't notified. Cash order from May, no disclaimer and no USS. Leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

I would have rejected but I've just had a baby and really needed the extra space and the wait for alternatives was too long. Lost a lot of brownie points with the wife

If I don't see anything from TV by Feb I will look at the used market or put an order in for an EV6. It's sad though as apart from this (and the way they treat their customers) it's a pretty great car!

 

[Ohinever]

I ordered from inventory, and at the time looked at the manual online that stated had uss. Of course came without.

My position is simple. If by eery next year we don't have a workable alternative, I'll take steps to reject the car under uk consumer law.

I will call them this week and see how much it might cost me to move into one with uss from inventory, which might work out cost neutral with incentives at the moment.

 

[Battpower]

how much it might cost me to move into one with uss from inventory,

If the numbers work out and it is an option, that sounds like something worth looking at.

I suspect that even if you do end up rejecting the non USS car, they might be able to make a deduction for your use and I doubt it would be at a favourable rate! Also, if you were unfortunate enough to have an accident.... even one linked to having no USS (!), I bet you'd be well penalised.

If there is a way to deal with it sooner, sounds all positive.

 

[Mike7564]

They have admitted they have removed some features and that you aren’t getting all parking assist features with statements such as this that I found from October.

Seems if you reject based on not having USS (when it was there at the time of delivery), you should be allowed to reject VINs indefinitely until these features are reactivated in an equivalent manner, get a full refund of $250 at least (not to mention damages for lost time/opportunity/higher loan costs to start the search over).

This all assumes they are upfront to everyone that they aren’t delivering the car you purchased and signed a contract for.

It’s also impossible for a customer to review/confirm every part/capability of the car at the time of delivery. In some locations, they don’t even let you open the door before accepting/rejecting the car.

Funny how the “order fee” is non-refundable because they need to “arrange logistics” of your order. But they’re perfectly fine delivering a car to you with missing capabilities you paid for. And not disclosing it. Seems like a legal goldmine.

 

[MP3Mike]

I ordered from inventory, and at the time looked at the manual online that stated had uss. Of course came without.

Did it actually say it has USS? Or did it just describe the Park Assist feature? For example the current Model Y manual:

Notice it says "if equipped" next to the sensors? And it says that just about everywhere:

So you probably can't complan about the lack of USS, but you could complain that the Park Assist feature is missing/not working.

 

[Danzr]

Seems if you reject based on not having USS (when it was there at the time of delivery), you should be allowed to reject VINs indefinitely until these features are reactivated in an equivalent manner, get a full refund of $250 at least (not to mention damages for lost time/opportunity/higher loan costs to start the search over).

This all assumes they are upfront to everyone that they aren’t delivering the car you purchased and signed a contract for.

It’s also impossible for a customer to review/confirm every part/capability of the car at the time of delivery. In some locations, they don’t even let you open the door before accepting/rejecting the car.

Funny how the “order fee” is non-refundable because they need to “arrange logistics” of your order. But they’re perfectly fine delivering a car to you with missing capabilities you paid for. And not disclosing it. Seems like a legal goldmine.

Pretty sure the order fee and any deposits paid are refundable in the UK regardless if you cancel as UK consumer law makes it unenforceable.

We also have a short term (30 day) right to reject if the vehicle is of unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described - if it was described as having USS and you weren't told otherwise I think you'd be in a good position here to reject the vehicle.

Good luck getting anything for lost time / opportunity / higher loan costs though, I think a refund and a mutual cancellation of the contract is the best you're going to get.

 

[Mike7564]

Pretty sure the order fee and any deposits paid are refundable in the UK regardless if you cancel as UK consumer law makes it unenforceable.

We also have a short term (30 day) right to reject if the vehicle is of unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described - if it was described as having USS and you weren't told otherwise I think you'd be in a good position here to reject the vehicle.

Good luck getting anything for lost time / opportunity / higher loan costs though, I think a refund and a mutual cancellation of the contract is the best you're going to get.

Ahh. You’re lucky then. I’m across the pond in the US.

 

[doats1]

They haven’t done that, nor will they until they have a replacement method. It’s not really worth speculating on something that’s not happened and probably won’t. It took over a year before they stopped using radar once TV started being used in the US.

For those that ordered before the removal was announced and didn’t get them and weren’t told, did you lease etc or did you buy? Sometimes you only get delegated access and the lease or finance company is the primary account holder, I wonder if they accepted on your behalf? If so your complaint is with them and not Tesla.

Not saying that have or will. But if they did, I doubt anyone could challenge them as long as park assist was still a feature they claim to deliver via other means.

 

[Danzr]

I am pretty confident that the occupancy network will work great for a lot of use cases, I'm less concerned about moving objects and those sort of issues as I'm not sure USS do a brilliant job with those anyway.

I just struggle to see how it'll ever have feature parity at night or in poor weather conditions.

 

[Ohinever]

Did it actually say it has USS? Or did it just describe the Park Assist feature? For example the current Model Y manual:

View attachment 886450

Notice it says "if equipped" next to the sensors? And it says that just about everywhere:
View attachment 886454
View attachment 886451
View attachment 886452

So you probably can't complan about the lack of USS, but you could complain that the Park Assist feature is missing/not working.

Good point. The fact the menu states it has park assist when it does not is the approach I'll take.