This has been discussed a lot. There is no other car company I'm aware of that requires such a service plan to keep the warranty in force.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I'm really confused because the warranty doesn't require the service plan and I know I saw someone quote other warranties that say basically what Tesla's says. Tesla's wording is pretty generic.
My RX8 Warranty says (this is about warranty on emissions, but wording exists for other areas too):
Those seem pretty similar to me.
I agree. Tesla is just protecting themselves the same way other automakers do from what I can tell. They're saying if you take the car to someone not authorized to work on it, we don't have to cover something under warranty if we determine either proper maintenance schedules weren't followed or the other service people messed something up. Also, who else knows how to diagnose and fix Tesla's battery systems other than Tesla? While I understand everyone is upset about the cost or the fact that it was announced after many had locked in their order, I don't see how this is really any different than anyone else. The only big difference I see is that there are no other authorized service people other than Tesla.
For such an expensive car, I'm going to follow the recommend service schedule by getting the service prepaid option. Maybe in 4 years there will be other options but I'll still probably stick with Tesla for service.
OK, in the Mazda warranty, which is typical, they say you can have the service done anywhere but if it's messed up, Mazda won't cover it. If it's not messed up, you warranty is still valid.
That's not at all what Tesla is saying. This is from George Blankenship's comment to the original service plan announcement on the Tesla site:
They are saying that even if nothing is wrong and nothing needs to be done to the car, failure to have Tesla inspect it will void the entire warranty. If that seems pretty similar to you, then we have a very different understanding of the word "similar".
The only relevant, legally binding wording is that which is on the actual warranty. As has been noted in prior posts, George isn't the legal department.
I think you missed the point of my example.
Suppose I concluded last week (September) that the warranty-conditional servicing was too expensive. I signed my MVPA in June. My only option is to forfeit $10k to "save" $2,400 (first 4 years) + unknown (next 4 years). That's a hell of a way to treat a customer.
I also noticed George says its void if you don't do the service, not if THEY didn't do the service... Cleverly worded, or a mistype?
At the risk of double-posting, GeorgeB explicitly said that he wasn't giving the full legal language. We now have the exact language of the warranty, and it does not say that "You will forfeit your warranty if you do not do Annual or 12,500 mile inspections." Instead, it says:
The warranty goes on to state:
Thus the warranty coverage may be at risk if your failure to improperly maintain the vehicle causes consequential damage to the car, e.g. increases the cost of repair because a faulty part (e.g. worn brake pad) damaged another (e.g. brake rotor).
The warranty goes on to state:
So, you are certainly putting your warranty at risk if maintenance, service or repairs are done for others, but it doesn't automatically void the warranty, nor could it under federal law. In my state, Tesla is required to provide (at reasonable cost) all the diagnostic codes and tools needed.
Beavis
Model S Signature 991
The language cited by ckessel is plain, clear and legally what you, as a buyer, are agreeing to. GB's blog post is not binding. The warranty requires that an owner's responsibility is to properly maintain the vehicle. Just like any other car. The only questions are who does it and how much. On the who question, the warranty requires a qualified technician. Right now, Tesla techs are the only ones qualified to work on the car. I think we should be reasonably able to agree with that. You can try someone else or try it yourself but will void the warranty if you or a non-Tesla tech f it up. Just like any other car.
That leaves only the cost question.
That leaves only the cost question.
It's really unfortunate George misspoke since it's pretty clear there is no legal requirement to have the service done by Tesla. I know some folks were really up in arms about having to have it done by Tesla. Someone earlier cancelled their reservation on the principal of it since he said specifically it wasn't about the money. That's really unfortunate since he cancelled on a principal that's not relevant given the actual wording of the warranty.
Now, if folks want to be up in arms about the cost, that's entirely subjective and I can understand it even if I don't fully agree.
- - - Updated - - -
All those options (Nav, leather, sunroof, xxx) cost far more than the $2000 service. You might give up one of those things. Nav is even free, though turn by turn is part of the tech package.
Saying someone is going to give up $3750(nav) + $1500(leather) + $1500(pano roof) to compensate for $2000 maintenance is some serious exaggeration. I get you were trying to make a point, but the exaggeration then immediately diminished the message.
Mycroft
Life happens
ckessel, please explain how the warranty can be maintained if it requires that "all vehicle maintenance and service requirements, including those indicated by the vehicle's systems" be performed --- and the *ONLY* way for those systems to be inspected and maintained is by Tesla service.
Unless Tesla comes out with some kind of a minimum service plan, say $100 every 12k/year for basic minimal drive train inspection service, then I don't see any way around buying the full meal deal and still maintaining the warranty.
Unless Tesla comes out with some kind of a minimum service plan, say $100 every 12k/year for basic minimal drive train inspection service, then I don't see any way around buying the full meal deal and still maintaining the warranty.
Off topic, but since you brought it up: ckessel, Can you please provide documentation for this statement? I'd love it to be true. The information I have gotten on this is that only Internet Google maps are available to assist navigation without the tech package, that there is no GPS installed in non-tech package cars and therefore no little pointer will mark your location on the Internet Google maps. This is different than smartphone Google maps which can in fact be used for navigation. Thus no navigation without the tech package, just static maps.
Please let us know if you have information to the contrary. Feel free to post a reply under "A brief look at the navigation system" thread under the User Interface subforum so as not to stay off topic here. Thanks!
Yep, you're absolutely right. I'm not sure what you're asking me to explain. My point had nothing to do with that. My point is the warranty doesn't require you use Tesla.
In practice though, you will use Tesla because it's a new car from a new company using new technology no one else knows how to service. You had to know that was going to be the case, though I can understand not liking how they're packaging that service (the "full meal" as you call it).
There are two separate concepts:
1) What the warranty requires
2) How Tesla lets you buy service
#1 is the same as every manufacturer, nothing much to see here. If one was going to stand on principle, this would be a poor choice to take a stand on.
#2 I can understand being upset, particularly since at this point in time there is no market other than Tesla for servicing. Maybe in a few years there will be enough Teslas are on the market to drive a secondary service market.
Last edited:
Other than not bundling in the $1,900 into the cost of the car and making it 'free', I'm having a hard time seeing the problem here. There are some people that have the skills and knowledge to work on their own cars but I'd imagine even they don't have the equipment to work on Tesla's battery pack or other propriety systems. After the 4 years are up, I understand the desire to possibly find cheaper service or do it yourself but within the first 4 years, I agree with ckessel. Tesla is the only game in town for service and will likely be for some time. This probably shouldn't have been a surprise but it appears to have caught some people off guard. I'm not saying people don't have legitimate concerns with effectively being locked into one company for service but that's the reality at the moment.
Food for thought...
George did say
He did then go on to say
But given the previous context and the paragraph about all the disclaimer issues trying to get this posted to the blog, I don't take this literally.
Fact is, nearly everything we've read or been told differs from the actual experience when the time comes. That's why I'm not getting upset. But I'm a Roadster owner and have experience with Tesla. So I can see how those where the Model S is their first Tesla purchase are confused and worried (at best) and angry and canceling or suing (at worst).
For now, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. They're awesome people and want to do the right thing by their customers. I know. I've spent hundreds of person-hours with many of them, including the execs. They've never done this before (and that includes getting the communication right).
George did say
He did then go on to say
But given the previous context and the paragraph about all the disclaimer issues trying to get this posted to the blog, I don't take this literally.
Fact is, nearly everything we've read or been told differs from the actual experience when the time comes. That's why I'm not getting upset. But I'm a Roadster owner and have experience with Tesla. So I can see how those where the Model S is their first Tesla purchase are confused and worried (at best) and angry and canceling or suing (at worst).
For now, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. They're awesome people and want to do the right thing by their customers. I know. I've spent hundreds of person-hours with many of them, including the execs. They've never done this before (and that includes getting the communication right).
Chas F
Model S 60kWh #P6396
Apparently you still misinterpret my wording so this will be my last comment on this subject with you. Using your logic that I exaggerated by including all of the options mentioned you would also have to conclude that the other person in the hypothetical scenario owns 4 cars. Obviously my intent was that you pick which option/car may be applicable. I am more than capable of doing the math necessary to offset the service fee, but I am no longer in the mood for a pointless debate.
I'm not really all that concerned about being locked into Tesla to service the car--it's not like I'd get it serviced anywhere else or even want to given all the positive ratings from the Roadster owners. It's the cost of the required service vs. the perceived amount of service required that's the problem. For the first 50,000 miles, things that go wrong should be covered by the warranty, so even if parts are replaced you shouldn't have to pay extra for it (which is what the maintenance is asking you to do in a roundabout way). Things like bulbs, wipers, washer fluids, and similar consumables don't add up to $600 per year during the first four years. If brake pads are required before 150,000 miles on a car with regenerative braking there is something seriously wrong.
Right now people are feeling upset because a lot of them were expecting a $100 bill similar to a Leaf for the annual service, and not the same price as an ICE car. I wasn't expecting $100 but $475-$600 is similar in cost to maintenance on an ICE car. George B. didn't give any specifics but a maintenance inspection should be plugging in the code reader and comparing the results to the standard, then physically looking at a few areas, and checking fluid levels. I think it's hard for most people to see more than $150 value for that ($250 with the Ranger visit).
There are three things that could have been done to avoid this reaction:
1. Downplay the part about EVs being lower maintenance than an ICE car. If you pay the same in maintenance, then it's not lower. (Of course, it's too late now to use this approach. Expectations have already been set.)
2. Have the maintenance last as long as the battery warranty. That would give a known fixed cost over the period. Because everyone knows that maintenance is likely to be more expensive during the second four years, having an eight year fixed cost would be easy to justify. The "There will be a plan but we're not telling you how much." approach isn't very confidence inspiring.
3. Itemize exactly what is done during the maintenance and how long each is going to take provided there is nothing to replace and also what part of the maintenance is for software upgrades. This one won't totally eliminate the lack of perceived value (because some of the items may come across as unnecessary to most folks) but at least it would show that something is being done other than just changing light bulbs and wiper blades.
In my email with Walter, I asked for what this plan would cost me. I see it as a huge value for the 85 kWh (unlimited miles, 8 years).
The answer: "At the moment Tesla does not have an extended warranty. I have fielded this request a few times, it’s usually near the top of my list for customer requests that I send to management."
So they don't even have it available at all (yet?), much less at the current pricing structure.
Similar threads
