Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

135

bbreve about 3 hours ago 39 commentsRead Article on electrek.co

ES version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

55% Positive

Analyzed from 1209 words in the discussion.

Discussion (39 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

joshribakoff•42 minutes ago

I recovered ~$250,000 under beverly song act (California lemon law). (My principal and interest back for multiple vehicles)

I repeatedly complained it was activating “emergency lane departure” while driving manually, even after disabling the setting. This had the effect of the vehicles swerving towards cross walks or walls.

Clearly a software issue but they played dumb and forced me to book service visits and refused to provide loaners.

Each time they returned the vehicle(s) with a short resolution of “expected characteristic”.

I read my purchase agreement, emailed them, and simply stated they are obliged to buy back my fleet given its a hazard to public safety. They obliged without discussion.

There were also other persistent issues with the vehicle beyond the software but i suspect the software put them into a double bind where if they “fix” it they create more liability via accidental disengagements.

SilverElfin•36 minutes ago

I’ve had this type of issue on multiple European car brands. Software issues with driver assistance features, which they keep ignoring. Things like sudden unexplained braking, not showing down due to cars stopped ahead, swerving randomly... I accepted it because getting them to cover anything, even physical things, even under warranty. They just come up with self serving guidelines and excuses.

Glad you had success. Did it require lawyers?

lokar•9 minutes ago

I (also in CA) lemon returned a Mercedes EV. Same kind of thing, they could not fix repeated software issues w/ the collision avoidance features.

I called them up, gave a short explanation, and they sent me to their vendor who handles the returns, no issues. Full price (including tax etc) back.

AIUI, they know not to fight, since in CA when they loose, they pay your legal fees.

romaaeterna•3 minutes ago

Why does HN publish this electrek spam?

bdcravens•34 minutes ago

It's not him they're fighting, it's precedence and the impending flood of lawsuits.

walrus01•5 minutes ago

I look forward to the day when this goes further up the hierarchy of US domestic courts, and some final decision is reached ordering Tesla to pay back the money every purchaser of "full self driving" paid for something that is clearly not level 4 or level 5 autonomy.

wrs•20 minutes ago

That idea of a simultaneous small claims day is brilliant. I hope somebody is vibecoding that site up right now.

walrus01•1 minute ago

Be sure to vibe code a way for everyone to save money and hire the same process serving company to do service by hand of multiple suits in bulk at the same time.

JumpCrisscross•12 minutes ago

Is there a fuck-you option by which a large company can force escalating costs on you through small claims? Can they, for example, remove it to a federal court?

jfim•6 minutes ago

I don't think they can, but at the same time they can appeal a judgement that's unfavorable to them. Appeals in small claims allow for having attorneys present, at least in California, and it's another day in court that you'll have to argue your case.

fhn•30 minutes ago

"court made a judgment in his favor in the amount of $10,672.88, the amount Gawiser paid for FSD, including taxes and court fees." should include interest as well

KumaBear•about 2 hours ago

Earning calls are when CEO’s are telling the truth about their products. Knowing Tesla’s history of making payments he won’t see a dime. I’m no lawyer but he should set up a publicity stunt like the man who seized Bank of America’s equipment in order to get paid in full the same day. (George and Ora Lee, successfully seized assets from a Bank of America branch after the bank wrongly foreclosed on their home)

jer0me•about 2 hours ago

I think you mean Warren and Maureen Nyerges: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/couple-almost-forecloses-on-ban...

George and Ora Lee appear to be a couple who died hours apart in 2016 after being married for 58 years.

KumaBear•about 1 hour ago

Yea you are right. Google failed me once again.

CamperBob2•about 2 hours ago

"Yeah, so they won't be giving the Bank of America any more trouble, capisce?" -- Bank of America

sanex•about 2 hours ago

BoA having roots in the Bank of Italy makes this even funnier.

xnx•about 2 hours ago

> George and Ora Lee, successfully seized assets from a Bank of America branch after the bank wrongly foreclosed on their home

This is the type of person that deserves to have a statue in public

the__alchemist•about 1 hour ago

The "Full" in "Full Self Driving" was one of the giveaways. It's like packaged food labeled with "Real" ("Real cheese" etc)

Neywiny•about 1 hour ago

Not sure I agree with your second sentence, at least in the US. I may see "cheese product" or "dairy product" or "cheese flavor" but if it says real cheese, it's real cheese. My favorite example was seeing "onion (then in tiny text 'flavored') rings"

gregschlom•about 1 hour ago

The point is that if you have to say it's made with real cheese, the food is complete junk. Even though the cheese may technically be real.

elif•20 minutes ago

They even banned the term "soy milk"

It's now called "non dairy soy beverage" on every carton.

nubinetwork•about 2 hours ago

Be smart and take a free battery.

ezfe•about 1 hour ago

What do you mean by that?

asdG17l•about 2 hours ago

But remember folks that Musk wants the best for humanity, is a humanist, wants to help all people and the future will be so awesome that no one will have to work and everyone will live in a penthouse.

His X says so daily, so it must be true.

charcircuit•about 2 hours ago

From what I've seen on YouTube the cars do drive themselves. This seems more like the type of thing with AI where people change the goal posts of what AI means. Just because a car did not slow down in a school zone, that doesn't mean that the car wasn't driving itself.

AlotOfReading•about 2 hours ago

This is a common misconception. People tend to think driving is controlling the steering and pedals, so if FSD does those things it must be driving.

It's not. Driving is whatever has ultimate responsibility for the vehicle and its occupants. If a cop pulls you over while FSD is enabled, it's not Tesla who's paying the ticket. If FSD has an issue, you're the driver who has to respond.

Think of FSD as a very nice cruise control. You're still driving, even if you aren't touching the wheel.

zadikian•3 minutes ago

It's a common misconception because the thing is called "full self driving."

pdpi•12 minutes ago

Sort of how programming isn't the same as writing code — it also involves a bunch of other thing like all the design and planning work.

loloquwowndueo•about 2 hours ago

By that logic it’s ok if the car slams itself against a concrete wall - just because it failed to stop in time doesn’t mean it wasn’t driving itself.

Self driving cars are supposed to obey the same rules as human drivers.

roenxi•13 minutes ago

Well ... yes. By that logic it is the case. It applies to humans too - if a human slams their car into a concrete wall then the human was still driving the car. They did a bad job of it, but they were in fact driving.

A car being driven autonomously doesn't imply much about the quality of that driving. They're still going to make bad decisions and have accidents, just like humans do (a friend of mine died slamming their car into a tree). There is probably some minimum where we'd say that it isn't really driving because it can't do anything right, but modern self driving systems are past that.

RajT88•about 2 hours ago

Tesla FSD is vulnerable to RoadRunner and Wile E. Coyote style tricks.

qingcharles•about 1 hour ago

Fortunately the ACME products are flawed and subject to their own litigation, see e.g. Coyote vs. ACME (2026).

throw7•about 1 hour ago

When full liability is put on the manufacturer, then we can talk about "cars driving themselves".

dawnerd•about 2 hours ago

Those YouTubers are all there to make Tesla look good. It’s a grift. The ones that are honest and show the bad side get kicked out of the Tesla club fast and dogpiled on.

Also a school zone is one of the most basic things the car should be able to handle. If it can’t do that, it’s not ready for public use.

roenxi•6 minutes ago

>Also a school zone is one of the most basic things the car should be able to handle. If it can’t do that, it’s not ready for public use.

Humans don't always follow the law driving through school zones. And when humans speed through a school zone, the human is definitely driving the car. Are we ready to let humans drive on public roads?

The argument has to go into the magnitude of the problem to get anywhere meaningful.

UltraSane•about 1 hour ago

Tesla FSD won't be level 5 until Tesla has liability for any crashes it causes the way Waymo does.

frakkingcylons•about 1 hour ago

See, that's really the best argument for this. It can drive itself the same way I can fly an Airbus A321. You can't sue me because I didn't land the plane "intact".

kalleboo•about 2 hours ago

Elon Musks claims included (exact quotes, these posts are still on X):

Jan 10, 2016: In ~2 years, summon should work anywhere connected by land & not blocked by borders, eg you're in LA and the car is in NY

Jul 16, 2019: If we make all cars with FSD package self-driving, as planned, any such Tesla should be worth $100k to $200k, as utility increases from ~12 hours/week to ~60 hours/week

These aren't moving goalposts by antis, this are the expectations set by Elon Musk himself when advertising his products.

Teever•about 2 hours ago

Here's more than a decade of claims from Tesla on self driving vehicles summarized in one handy table:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autono...