You’ll own nothing and be happy they say.
You’ll own nothing and be happy they say.
Go Green they say.
Go Green they say.
So why was the guy locked out of his own car? There's got to be more to the story than just him not wanting to buy a new battery.
So why was the guy locked out of his own car? There's got to be more to the story than just him not wanting to buy a new battery.
I suspect the battery is just dead and the doors are locked. I had a dead battery in my Chevy truck one time and the fob would not unlock the doors just the same. I didn't blame Chevrolet for "Locking me out" I guess Teslas don't have a keyhole in the door? I'll have to look at one next time I see it.
I suspect the battery is just dead and the doors are locked. I had a dead battery in my Chevy truck one time and the fob would not unlock the doors just the same. I didn't blame Chevrolet for "Locking me out" I guess Teslas don't have a keyhole in the door? I'll have to look at one next time I see it.
Tesla declares total loss on the batteries for the slightest ding, dent or scratch. Granted, the batteries are hyper volatile and any dent can potentially cause them to burst into a very difficult to smother fire, but at the same time they are extreme about this. Almost any damage at all and Tesla will declare you need an entirely new battery. Which itself is misleading because it's not a single battery, it's a fuckload of 18860 (or whatever number they are, not gonna look it up) laptop batteries wired in series in a big plastic case or whatever.
So theoretically they could just replace the impacted cells and it would cost, at MOST, a few hundred dollars.
But that's not their policy. Their policy is that any damage warrants replacing the entire array, which is $26k+ depending on model etc etc. Guaranteed they reclaim and reuse all the undamaged cells anyway, but it's basically a scam.
Teslas are fucking garbage, not only because EVs are garbage in general but because of the policies related to maintenance of the cars.
Tesla declares total loss on the batteries for the slightest ding, dent or scratch. Granted, the batteries are hyper volatile and any dent can potentially cause them to burst into a very difficult to smother fire, but at the same time they are extreme about this. Almost any damage at all and Tesla will declare you need an entirely new battery. Which itself is misleading because it's not a single battery, it's a fuckload of 18860 (or whatever number they are, not gonna look it up) laptop batteries wired in series in a big plastic case or whatever.
So theoretically they could just replace the impacted cells and it would cost, at MOST, a few hundred dollars.
But that's not their policy. Their policy is that any damage warrants replacing the entire array, which is $26k+ depending on model etc etc. Guaranteed they reclaim and reuse all the undamaged cells anyway, but it's basically a scam.
Teslas are fucking garbage, not only because EVs are garbage in general but because of the policies related to maintenance of the cars.
Well, you don't ever actually own Teslas. They own you!
Well, you don't ever actually own Teslas. They own you!
In the US, that's not legal unless you explicitly give permission.
In the US, that's not legal unless you explicitly give permission.
As shitty as the situation is for him I think he is not telling it quite truthfully. I don't think Tesla has actually proactively "locked" him out of the car. It sounds like the battery is dead and the doors are locked and they won't unlock without power. The car is out of warranty and really, it's not their problem. Be a smarter consumer.
As shitty as the situation is for him I think he is not telling it quite truthfully. I don't think Tesla has actually proactively "locked" him out of the car. It sounds like the battery is dead and the doors are locked and they won't unlock without power. The car is out of warranty and really, it's not their problem. Be a smarter consumer.
Exactly. Can guarantee he signed a contract stating he would pay for it on specific terms and failure to pay accordingly would result is immobilization of the vehicle.
Exactly. Can guarantee he signed a contract stating he would pay for it on specific terms and failure to pay accordingly would result is immobilization of the vehicle.
It's legal because he's essentially leasing a software based project with some hardware that he sort of owns but can't run without that software lease being in place. They didn't revoke access to the hardware he owns, they revoked access to use the software he is renting from Tesla. Which is "legal" even though it's shady as fuck and obviously not what the law intended by allowing software licenses to be revoked in that way.
It's legal because he's essentially leasing a software based project with some hardware that he sort of owns but can't run without that software lease being in place. They didn't revoke access to the hardware he owns, they revoked access to use the software he is renting from Tesla. Which is "legal" even though it's shady as fuck and obviously not what the law intended by allowing software licenses to be revoked in that way.
Not really.
You'll find that he signed a contract stating they have a right to do this. This is standard contracteze for those who buy from those no credit lots. They put equipment (immobilizer with GPS) into the vehicle to do exactly this until the vehicle is paid off. If they miss a payment the vehicle is turned off. Take too long to catch up and they pick it up.
But without the contractual clause they can't legally disable a vehicle until it has been lawful repossessed. Thus the contractual requirement.
Not really.
You'll find that he signed a contract stating they have a right to do this. This is standard contracteze for those who buy from those no credit lots. They put equipment (immobilizer with GPS) into the vehicle to do exactly this until the vehicle is paid off. If they miss a payment the vehicle is turned off. Take too long to catch up and they pick it up.
But without the contractual clause they can't legally disable a vehicle until it has been lawful repossessed. Thus the contractual requirement.
(post is archived)