A judge has ordered Tesla to upgrade customers’ self-driving computers at no additional cost so that they can join Tesla’s fully self-driving program at no additional cost. For customers frustrated with Tesla selling its self-driving package to customers before it actually offered a fully functional feature, this is a win.
Tesla claims that all vehicles produced after 2016 have “all necessary hardware” to become self-driving with future software updates.
The automaker has yet to live up to its promise, in fact the company had to upgrade the hardware of vehicles produced after 2016. Most notably, Tesla had to upgrade the in-vehicle computer that runs the self-driving software. The new computers are known as Hardware 3.0 or FSD computers.
Tesla is offering a free computer to owners who order a fully self-driving package, fulfilling a 2016 promise that future vehicles will have “all the necessary hardware” to be self-driving. Offered mods.
The fact that Tesla was doing retrofits for free quashed people’s concerns that their hardware would need to be updated to access self-driving cars.
But things got more complicated last year when Tesla launched a fully self-driving subscription package for $199 a month. Instead of buying the full self-driving package outright, which currently costs $15,000, Tesla owners had the opportunity to pay $199 a month to take advantage of the features available in the package.
The problem was that for owners who didn’t retrofit a fully self-driving computer, Tesla was charging $1,500 (later reduced to $1,000) to get the computer before getting the FSD subscription. is.
As we pointed out in our article on the situation, this seems to run counter to Tesla’s promise of free hardware upgrades as needed to deliver the promised self-driving capabilities after 2016. I saw.
Now, Tesla owners are successfully testing this theory in court.
Tesla Model 3 owner Ian Jordan has decided to file a complaint in small claims court in Washington state after his request for a settlement from Tesla was ignored.
His Model 3 has a hardware 2.5 computer, and Tesla wanted to charge him $1,000 to upgrade to a new computer before he joined the FSD. Jordan challenged the charges in small claims court.
Jordan won because Tesla didn’t show up to defend himself. But the judge’s ruling was interesting.
Judge Matthew A. Scow wrote in the conclusion of the case:
In addition, the plaintiff purchased a second Tesla Model 3, relying on the company’s advertisement that all Tesla 3 models come with all the hardware necessary for self-driving. Defendant found that actually installing the self-driving feature, in violation of Tesla’s false advertising, would cost him $1,106 in additional hardware upgrades.
He basically calls Tesla’s claims “false advertising.”
Jordan also made another claim against Tesla for the loss of functionality in his other Tesla vehicle, which was equipped with the original MCU1 media unit. Even though it was still under warranty, Tesla said it couldn’t fix the problem and instead recommended a paid upgrade to a new generation media computer (MCU 2).
A judge ruled that this was a breach of warranty and ordered Tesla to pay Jordan $1,657.50 (the cost of upgrading to a new computer). Tesla’s solution of upgrading to a new computer, rather than restoring the functionality of the original computer, resulted in the loss of the AM radio, which was not available in MCU 2, so he decided to use his has ordered a prize of $500.
jordan said electric Tesla promptly paid the amount ordered by the court.
Electrek take
This owner has paved an interesting path for Tesla owners in a similar situation to force Tesla to do the right thing. However, keep in mind that the difficulty of filing in small claims court varies by location.
Customers are also exploring other avenues, including class-action lawsuits, to force Tesla to keep its hardware promises and deliver functional self-driving capabilities.
Last week, we reported that Tesla had tried to dismiss the lawsuit, saying “failure to achieve long-term, ambitious goals is not fraud.”
Jordan’s approach may be a better short-term solution for those who want to take advantage of the microbilling system.
Interestingly, Jordan said he used our article on FSD coverage as evidence before the judge. Interestingly, Tesla CEO Elon Musk blocked Electrek and my personal his Twitter account after posting the article.
I can’t confirm if that was the reason it was blocked, but at the time there were no other posts that could have caused this.
FTC: We use automated affiliate links to earn income. more.
