Here's something that will shock you: this story is false. Based on comments so far most people, even those defending Tesla, accepted the false premise that NH

Here's something that will shock you: this story is false. Based on comments so far most people, even those defending Tesla, accepted the false premise that NHTSA decided to investigate Tesla on its own. That's not what happened. Originally the author claimed NHTSA launched "investigation" into Tesla. NHTSA contacted LATIMES and said this is "defect petition", not an investigation, so he reluctantly changed it to "probe" because he "doesn't want to argue over definition of words". Here's the proof: https://twitter.com/russ1mitchell/status/1190352973013995520 https://twitter.com/russ1mitchell/status/1190352973013995520 https://twitter.com/VGrinshpun/status/1191187292288929792 https://twitter.com/VGrinshpun/status/1191187292288929792 is a longer expose of how biased and misleading this article is. The short of it is: someone complain to NHTSA and they are bound by the law to investigate the complaints, hence the "defect petition" (i.e. someone petitioned NHTSA claiming that Tesla's are defective) even if they don't believe any of it. Hence request of relevant documents from Tesla. For context: Russ Mitchell, the author of this article, is a full-on Tesla hater. If you read his LA Times articles you'll see an extreme anti-Tesla bias. His tweeter feed is almost a daily stream of retweeting anti-Tesla news, making anti-Tesla comments. That LA Times allows this guy to report on Tesla is just mind-boggling.