21 ms·

A bit of a stretch to classify this under right to repair.. if you rent a car from tesla, it’s going to be up to tesla to choose how it’s repaired. And it doesn

A bit of a stretch to classify this under right to repair.. if you rent a car from tesla, it’s going to be up to tesla to choose how it’s repaired. And it doesn’t seem unreasonable that they won’t accept a hack fix (however safe it may be) - that car is going to be sold to someone once the lease expires, they just can’t take the risk I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy it, don’t! This holds true for any depreciating asset.

garmaine 5y ago
Tesla doesn't let you do your own repairs on cars you "own" either.
- roflchoppa 5y ago
  Nor will they sell you parts to repair it.
  - hef19898 5y ago
    So truely the Apple of cars then.
    - Hamuko 5y ago
      At least the battery isn't glued in.
    - smt88 5y ago
      Not exactly. Apple is renowned for the build quality of their hardware.
      - kuratkull 5y ago
        Not sarcasm + sarcasm?
      - raisedbyninjas 5y ago
        Tesla design and build quality can sometimes be pretty good after several years of questionable revisions.
      - coupdejarnac 5y ago
        Unless you've been watching Louis Rossman's repair videos for the past few years and have seen the same design flaws never getting fixed.
      - techrat 5y ago
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8 - The horrible truth about Apple's repeated engineering failures. - Louis Rossmann
        simondotau 5y ago
        The only difference between Apple and its competitors (Dell, Acer, Samsung, etc) is that Apple's shiny brand image makes content like Louis Rossmann's compelling. If the same treatment was applied to the likes of Dell and Acer, they'd be looking just as bad if not far, far worse than Apple. (To be clear, the above is regarding Apple's engineering specifically, not about their business practices. I agree that Apple's competitors are generally far better at parts supply and general right-to-repair matters.)
        techrat 5y ago
        Funny because I've never had problems with, what is commonly accepted as the lowest of the three you mentioned: Acer, like I have with Apple. I have an old Chromebook C710 that just. will. not. die. My Partner's newer Macbook only has one working USB port now. There are more Apple products in my product history graveyard than everything else. Combined. I've long come to the conclusion that people simply treated their Apple devices better and not that they actually were higher quality or better engineered.
        simondotau 5y ago
        Fascinating. My own experience has been exactly the opposite. Every single Apple product I've ever bought has worked perfectly for their entire useful life. My own Apple graveyard is a stack of devices in perfect working condition. Whereas I'm looking at my pile of non-Apple devices and every single one of them had to be repaired, replaced or abandoned due to hardware failures. I've had to replace numerous Lenovo tablets and the last (expensive!) Dell laptop I bought started randomly crashing upon resume from sleep. And don't get me started on the Microsoft Surface Book. My partner (who worked at Microsoft) chose this as their work laptop. Junk. Driver problems. DRIVER PROBLEMS on MICROSOFT'S own hardware, managed by MICROSOFT'S own IT department.
      - markdown 5y ago
        That's an outdated perception. Look up flexgate. Apple acknowledged that they built faulty hardware, and yet still won't fix my laptop. Fuck 'em.
      - omega3 5y ago
        Surely this is a joke
  - judge2020 5y ago
    As far as I can tell other manufacturers don't do any direct-to-consumer sales either - Honda seems to basically be a middleman to selling you parts that your local dealership has in-stock.
    - topkai22 5y ago
      That is because, for historical reasons, they are generally not legally able to. Tesla has actually done great work pushing back on the requirements many states had to franchise automobile sales. However, almost every existing manufacturer has the entire country divided up into franchises and it is a legal nightmare to unpack it.
    - roflchoppa 5y ago
      I’m a little confused by this statement; but here are my service options for my datsun. I can order parts from my local dealer, an online dealer, (and I’ve never tried it but I assume from Nissan), and finally the Nissan Motorsports department. If Tesla chooses to have no dealerships, then I have to go to them for support. If I go to a dealership and get ripped off, I can call the manufacturer and they can assist with the problem. Happened to our TSX when the motor was burning oil and the guy who was at the parts shop was saying it was within spec. I had to get a support representative from Honda involved with the repair.
    - garmaine 5y ago
      They provide parts to more than just dealerships. There are plenty of auto parts warehouses you can order OEM parts from.
- iamcreasy 5y ago
  This 2017 news from electrek[1] contradicts your claim. [1]: https://electrek.co/2017/01/30/tesla-opening-up-service-replacement-parts/ https://electrek.co/2017/01/30/tesla-opening-up-service-repl...
  - xmprt 5y ago
    Electrek is a very biased website in favor of electric vehicles so it makes sense they would say positive things about Tesla. Also, the first sentence of that article is about how this is only a thing in Massachusetts because of right to repair laws. If Tesla could, they would brick or make certain systems not operational if you don't use first party parts.
    - iamcreasy 5y ago
      I agree that Electrek is biased, but they usually provide substantive materials in terms of source and quotes to backup their claim. Also, it is a 2017 article, and things have improved since then. For example, Tesla has released their parts catalog for all models. Things are still far from prefect though, as you still can not buy those parts. Hopefully with this new Right to Repair Executive order - this situation will improve.
      - olyjohn 5y ago
        What good is a parts catalog if you can't buy the parts?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
stevev 5y ago
Hack fix are subjective. That same logic can be applied to any car makes. Repairs are not a black box. They’re not using duck tape. A fix is a fix
- kube-system 5y ago
  If you take an engineered system and apply a non-engineered fix, I'd say it's a hack, even if it works. Did this person do a metallurgical/chemical engineering analysis before changing the material type? OEMs do this on their cooling systems. No, they used a standard off-the-shelf fitting out of convenience. Will it work? Probably. Is it a compromise in terms of engineering design and testing? absolutely. Mind you, Tesla owns this car, and they probably would like to keep it in the condition in which they lent it out.
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    I think some of the outrage is Tesla owning the car, but essentially demanding the renter keep it in like-new condition. Legally subject to the terms of the lease, of course. But it feels unfair not to accept normal wear and tear and reasonable repair.
    - judge2020 5y ago
      Lease monthly payments are charges for depreciation plus profit, so they do expect you to keep it in like-new condition. Tesla's screw-up was giving the customer the car and not verifying that they have comprehensive insurance, which is what Tesla relies on for keeping it like-new.
      - kube-system 5y ago
        I bet they do have comprehensive insurance, but their insurance company told them that this is a collision loss. Just read my policy, which is written by a very large insurer -- and this would, in fact, be a collision loss under mine.
mschild 5y ago
Sure, except Tesla has a history of performing just as janky repairs on their cars themselves. Its even stated in the article.[0] Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? Driving around with a shoddy fix on a combustion engine can be just as dangerous. Yet, there are plenty independent mechanics that do a great job because they have access to OEM parts and manuals. [0] https://www.thedrive.com/tech/36274/tesla-model-y-owners-find-cooling-system-cobbled-together-with-home-depot-grade-fake-wood https://www.thedrive.com/tech/36274/tesla-model-y-owners-fin...
- belval 5y ago
  > Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? The quote is to replace the whole battery pack so I really doubt that they are making a profit on it since it's one of the actually expensive part of the car. As GP pointed out this is hardly right to repair, if Tesla quoted a whole pack that means there aren't any official operating procedures to replace to fix that part without replacing it while you can 100% blame Tesla for that, right-to-repair is about making parts available to do official repair, it's not about letting you figure out clever fixes on your car.
  - sleepybrett 5y ago
    Not only did they quote a whole battery pack for this simple repair, but the guy should have the right to keep the 'broken' battery pack (as a backup after he got it repaired) since he is buying a new one for full price. But tesla was refusing that as well.
    - cobookman 5y ago
      Especially since the used battery pack would likely fetch 11k+ on ebay.
  - deleted 5y ago
mulmen 5y ago
When I rent a car I am not responsible for repairs. If I am on the hook for the repair bill I should get a choice in how the car is repaired. I can buy whatever tires I want for a leased car. If Tesla wants to make these kinds of demands then the repair should be part of the warranty and priced in to the car. > I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy it, don’t! This holds true for any depreciating asset. If the asset depreciates what's the benefit in buying it? The fact that cars depreciate seems like the best reason to "rent" them. The manufacturer ends up dealing with the now less valuable asset.
- yarky 5y ago
  Not the OP but "If you can’t buy it, don’t!" might mean not owning/renting it. Either buy it or don't even think about it.
  - mulmen 5y ago
    Why though? What if renting makes more sense for my use case? Why not leave the dealer/bank on the hook for the depreciation and maintenance?
    - kuratkull 5y ago
      The dealer/bank are running a profitable business. They are not on the hook for anything, you are paying for it all.
      - mulmen 5y ago
        When I lease a new car repairs happen under the warranty. The manufacturer is “on the hook” for fixing the car. Not necessarily because it is leased but because it is under warranty. Leases are a way to always have a car that is under warranty. You are replying to a counter argument to the claim that leases are always a bad idea.
        lolinder 5y ago
Pyramus 5y ago
If you watch the video [1] Chad (former Tesla repair technician) clearly states it's the issue is due to cost effectiveness not whether the car is under lease. It's also not constrained the nose that was damaged here - whenever a part of the battery pack is damaged (could be a single cell) Tesla will replace the whole battery pack but not the part. I believe Chad calls it "assembly replacement". It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts, and do the (dis-)assembly. Which is exactly why we need right to repair. [1] https://youtu.be/vVSw3KSevEc?t=1415 https://youtu.be/vVSw3KSevEc?t=1415
- wnevets 5y ago
  > It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts Surely its more cost effective for the customer that requires this repair?
  - Pyramus 5y ago
    Absolutely - when I say cost effective I'm talking on behalf of the company of course.
- majormajor 5y ago
  Does Tesla then have a separate workflow that re-uses the components of the "broken" 16K battery pack? Seems like that is necessary in order for spending an extra 15K in parts to be worth more than training some more people to repair them... but then in that case, the sticker price of the repair also doesn't seem like it should be 16k, since Tesla's taking the old battery and capturing that side of the value too.
- vfclists 5y ago
  > It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts, and do the (dis-)assembly. Which is exactly why we need right to repair. I think he means "Its not cost effective "for Tesla" to train staff, have facilities and parts ..."
- ErikVandeWater 5y ago
  I thought a big part of the pack being made of modular cells is that the software can disengage cells that are problematic and you can keep running with the 999 remaining cells?
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy it, don’t! This holds true for any depreciating asset. If it flies, floats... The calculation on whether to lease or buy is a little more complicated than can be captured with rules of thumb.
passivate 5y ago
>that they won’t accept a hack fix (however safe it may be) - that car is going to be sold to someone once the lease expires, they just can’t take the risk But why are you calling it a hack fix? Also, why would a competent third-party repair shop be "risky"? A customer should be free to pick out an experienced and competent repair-shop just the way they currently do for their cars. And if they don't want to, they can take it to the dealership like they would have anyway. Right to repair is an extra _option_ for the consumer. Manufacturers are taking it away for future guaranteed service income (ala subscription model). In my opinion, it has absolutely nothing to do with "risk". > that car is going to be sold to someone once the lease expires, they just can’t take the risk How is the risk different from the existing leased model in any industry?
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  > A customer should be free to pick out an experienced and competent repair-shop just the way they currently do for their cars. And if they don't want to, they can take it to the dealership like they would have anyway. I would agree, as long as that third party has insurance in the event their fix (due to work performed on the high voltage battery pack) causes a failure resulting in the loss of the vehicle and liability from that failure event. In this specific case, I hope Mr. Benoit or his garage has robust liability coverage (at least $1M, hopefully more), especially if a failure event happens while the vehicle is fast DC charging or charging in someone's home overnight. (disclosure: Tesla owner who performs his own work)
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    Your peddling FUD. Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make you liable for anything that something does in perpetuity unless there is evidence that it's actually your fault. Homeowners insurance covers the fire. They probably don't go after anyone unless they have specific reason to believe the loss was probably caused by a pattern of action that could result in a winnable lawsuit (good luck figuring that out when you have a melted lump of car to to work with). If someone does somehow go after the shop their insurance goes to bat for them and digs up all the reasons they're not liable and this was a reasonable repair that their customer performed.
busterarm 5y ago
Plans for future Tesla vehicles are for the batteries to be structural. As in non-replaceable. In that future and without right to repair, a crack in this tiny plastic hose fitting would total the car (heck, depending on your insurer, this already does). Remember that car insurance costs are pooled. This kind of behavior makes _everyone's_ driving more expensive.
- vfclists 5y ago
  Who is to say that the insurance company owners don't have shares in Tesla?
- drtgh 5y ago
  It seems Tesla, Inc. makes most of the profit by selling Carbon-Emissions Credits to other vehicles manufacturers. I would not be surprised if they expects from that future making extra profit by "recycling" damaged structures, or something related to such structure. Something for cover the decline in carbon-emissions sales in such future. Anyway, I think that is called "Programed obsolescence". It's like when led bulbs suddenly fails, you know it can be repaired, even you know how to replace the bad quality capacitor chosen by the manufacturer, but the plastic encapsulation prevents it. Programed obsolescence + prevent to repair.
  - simondotau 5y ago
    Tesla's core business of car manufacturing is extremely profitable. Their automotive gross margin is substantially higher than most of their competitors, including the likes of Mercedes and BMW. It's only after you add on the costs of growth (capital expenditure, R&D, etc) that overall company profits become marginal. This is because Tesla is doing exactly what you'd expect from a company undergoing rapid growth: they're spending every dollar they can on growing. Yes, Tesla have received a windfall of cash from credit sales, but all these have done is turbocharged their growth spending. If they didn't have this extra cash, they probably would have had to wait 12 months before beginning construction in either Berlin or Texas.
- simondotau 5y ago
Aeolun 5y ago
I don’t get this. If I’m leasing the car, why would I be on the hook for the repair? The whole point of paying the lease premium is that you aren’t.
- brewdad 5y ago
  I hope you aren't currently leasing any vehicles. If you are, and this is your understanding of how leases work, you REALLY need to reread the contract. Tesla is in no way responsible for repairing this car under these circumstances.
  - Aeolun 5y ago
    That depends entirely on what is in your contract. I’m not currently leasing, but any I can get here automatically has me pay for insurance too. I think that’s a fairly smart idea, exactly to avoid issues like this.
- djrogers 5y ago
  No, that’s not the point at all. In fact with any lease you are required to carry insurance to cover accidents like this. The person in question did not have said insurance.
mathfailure 5y ago
No, not stretch at all. If it's up to company to choose how their car (that they rented to someone) needs to be repaired - it should either be done by their expenses to be fair. Otherwise they will always just choose the most expensive way (like 10x, 100x, unlimited x) and that won't be fair at all. A car is just an utility, that's not a unique piece of art, such matters should be regulated, a price of $16k for a repair that can be done 10 fold cheaper is just not fair.
datavirtue 5y ago
That fix was totally legit. I would considered the car better after having threaded in a brass nipple to replace the piece of crap that broke. This feels like a classic repair rip off and they were fishing for a customer who had more money than brains.
dheera 5y ago
> if you rent a car Renting and leasing are different. If it really is a rental they should be able to return the car at any time and stop payments at no cost. They should not have to foot the bill for repair unless it was due to negligence. That's the whole point of renting.
novok 5y ago
If I rent an apartment and the landlord doesn't fix something, I can fix it with my own repairman and charge them the bill. There is nothing special about renting.
- Chris2048 5y ago
  If the pipes in an apartment fail, the building won't murder someone on the highway.
  - lexs 5y ago
    Electrical fires, mold, etc etc there is enough things can be dangerous and harmful in an apartment.
    - Chris2048 5y ago
      to people on the highway?
      - novok 5y ago
        To others in the apartment, and potentially, the entire neighborhood if a fire gets bad enough. Don't be so literal.
        Chris2048 5y ago
        Don't be so literal? You want me to abstract enough so that you're right? car and house insurance are different. Trying for spurious similarities to suggest otherwise bears no useful insights.
kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
Magnuson-Moss forces them to accept third party fixes. I's been law for 45 years. The current state of affairs with monopolistic control over servicing eliminates competition and allows them to gouge on repairs like this. It is exactly what RTR is trying to fix.
beiller 5y ago
If the customer is willing to take the risk, and the repair shop takes on liability, why would Tesla care? Brand image? This is already negatively affecting their brand image (for me).
- rurounijones 5y ago
  Because Tesla owns the car (It is a leased car) and want it fixed according to the manufacturer's specifications (which happens to be them). It is not an unreasonable request. However I completely understand the complaints people are making about repairability and insurance shennanigans etc.
crmrc114 5y ago
Mate, your talking about a brass nipple being threaded into a broken plastic part to replace a plastic reducer that was [probably] poorly ultrasonic welded in place. What I see in the article is a common sense repair. Anyone who turns a wrench is laughing at the Tesla fanboy pearl clutching over this. Not an attack on your post btw, just a general statement that every Tesla owner comes out of the cracks in these posts and talks about how magical their cars are and how they are so advanced that no one could possibly understand them. The SAE has programs and industry standards on EV's- every other car manufacturer works with aftermarket shops. Teslas are not made of magic pixie dust and rainbows. The Gen1 tesla roadster was all Toyota parts. Their advanced motor technology is based on reluctance motors invented in the late 1800's. Tossing tcp/ip in your car as a bus [vs much better industrial protocols] and a vfd and calling something groundbreaking does not make it so. You should have access to the documentation and parts- I and many other gear heads will refuse to drive/own/buy any Tesla car until I can turn a wrench on it. How would you feel if I told you only Dell/HP should make computers because people make dangerous repairs that will allow hackers to attack systems? It's just as ridiculous when people make claims that fixing a busted fitting is a 'hack'. imho Tesla Autos are straight-up 'unauthorised bread'.
- alrs 5y ago
  Tesla stockholders, not Tesla owners, but yes.
  - Larrikin 5y ago
    It took a while to realize irrational defenses of Elon Musk/Tesla and down voting nearly anything negative about either were tied to the large number of people here who have invested significant sums in the stock and not so much a cult of personality.
- mulmen 5y ago
  The Gen 1 Tesla Roadster was a license built Lotus Elise. The Lotus Elise had a Toyota motor, the Tesla was all electric, what other Toyota parts are you talking about? Did they also use Toyota accessories?
gameswithgo 5y ago
In the usa there is established law that a car maker cannot void the warranty just because of a repair or modification you did. They have to prove that what you did actually caused the problem. For minor issues dealers will often screw you anyway, but when facing a 16k bill you could certainly lawyer up a little
craig131 5y ago
Kind of bad faith to throw rent in there, of course right to repair doesn't mean you have the right to repair rented things.
- lolinder 5y ago
  Why is it bad faith? The article is about a guy who leased a Tesla.
dexterdog 5y ago
Fine, then Tesla should not be charging the price of a full battery replacement plus labor for the fix since they are getting a full battery that can be very simply refurbished and then sold as such.
causality0 5y ago
Do you have a right to reasonable charges for damage of rented items? If you rent a jackhammer and break the trigger is it fair to charge the customer five hundred dollars to repair a ten dollar piece of plastic? If you rent a wedding dress and rip a seam should you be expected to pay a fashion designer for the stitching? Nobody would ever rent anything if every object was a minefield of potential absurd over-charges.
errno22222 5y ago
Isn't the universal saying if it drives, flies or fcuks rent it, don't buy it? I believe commonly attribute to Buffett but I never verified source.
hellbannedguy 5y ago
You are absolutely right, and I am a huge Right to Repair guy. I hope people that lease vechicles see this. (I was under the assumption that all leases had to have full coverage auto insurance before you even signed the lease? And yes--on most insurance policies road hazard insurance is extra, but just assumed on a lease it would be included. I still remember the battle axe who kept questioning me over a broken windshield. She wouldn't shut up, until I mentioned CA has an Insurance Commissioner.)
neximo64 5y ago
Are you a fan of tesla by any chance?
ineedasername 5y ago
The article seems to imply that Tesla can very well fix this issue, but they don't train & equip their service centers to maintain the battery. When the lease is turned in, it will just have to go back to the factory. Destination/freight charges on a car are often about $1200, and this was otherwise a simple fix. If Tesla feels the need to charge the customer for using a 3rd party repair service that recreated a stronger version of the original fittings then the current owner will still have saved about $14,000, AND all of.your concerns will have been addressed.
nwallin 5y ago
Is Tesla demanding that they actually fix it their way? From the article it reads as if he took it to the dealer to get it repaired, they quoted him $16k, so he took it somewhere else. I could be wrong though.
CogitoCogito 5y ago
> A bit of a stretch to classify this under right to repair.. if you rent a car from tesla, it’s going to be up to tesla to choose how it’s repaired. So you're cool with Tesla choosing to repair it for 30k? For 100k? Where does this stop? > And it doesn’t seem unreasonable that they won’t accept a hack fix (however safe it may be) - that car is going to be sold to someone once the lease expires, they just can’t take the risk What do you mean by "however safe it can be"? If it's as safe as Tesla's other repair method, then there is no increase in risk.
pjc50 5y ago
Hang on, if it's rented, why is the rentor liable for the repair? Is this where we get into a discussion of damage waivers and insurance excesses?
sschueller 5y ago
"hack fix". Have you seen some of the garbage hacks Tesla put in the cars they sold as new? 3d printed parts[1] and I am not talking about industrial 3d prints. These prints look like they come of a $200 home printer. [1] https://www.sculpteo.com/blog/2020/04/29/tesla-replaces-flawed-car-components-using-3d-printing/ https://www.sculpteo.com/blog/2020/04/29/tesla-replaces-flaw...
IkmoIkmo 5y ago
I also don't really get how this works, it's a lease. In my country a lease includes all payments except fuel. That means the car, the insurance, the taxes. If anything happens (outside of you wilfully ramming the car into something), it's covered by the lease. The car company makes sure to get insured and may seek payout from their insurance company, but you're not involved. That puts the onus on the car company to look for the cheapest but most effective maintenance and repairs. If they're routinely paying $16k for an $800 repair, the average cost of tesla leases would go up by a bit to the point they're not competitive in lease pricing versus others who get it done for the $800. And any car manufacturer which creates a system that inflates repair prices for whatever reason, would be similarly unfavourable for leasing. If this was a personal car, very different story. Now you have an individual getting screwed 75% of the cost of the car for a minor plastic replacement, with no recourse. Here you need right to repair. But for lease companies it all averages out, lease prices are positioned based on that average, and if the average is consistently high, Tesla is just disqualifying themselves from the market. There's no need for a legal framework to solve that when there's plenty of market incentives already. But somehow for this guy it wasn't covered, but the solution seems to me not to have right to unlicensed repair of a car that another company owns, but rather that the lease contract (particularly insurance coverage) was poor and should've had coverage for stuff like this. That responsibility lies with the consumer, but because insurance can be technical and hard to understand, I'm entirely in favour of more mandatory insurances for consumer protection. But that's often not a popular take on HN. (we just had a discussion a week ago about mandatory insurance being too high in the US).

garmaine 5y ago

Tesla doesn't let you do your own repairs on cars you "own" either.

roflchoppa 5y ago
Nor will they sell you parts to repair it.
- hef19898 5y ago
  So truely the Apple of cars then.
  - Hamuko 5y ago
    At least the battery isn't glued in.
  - smt88 5y ago
    Not exactly. Apple is renowned for the build quality of their hardware.
    - kuratkull 5y ago
      Not sarcasm + sarcasm?
    - raisedbyninjas 5y ago
      Tesla design and build quality can sometimes be pretty good after several years of questionable revisions.
    - coupdejarnac 5y ago
      Unless you've been watching Louis Rossman's repair videos for the past few years and have seen the same design flaws never getting fixed.
    - techrat 5y ago
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8 - The horrible truth about Apple's repeated engineering failures. - Louis Rossmann
      - simondotau 5y ago
        The only difference between Apple and its competitors (Dell, Acer, Samsung, etc) is that Apple's shiny brand image makes content like Louis Rossmann's compelling. If the same treatment was applied to the likes of Dell and Acer, they'd be looking just as bad if not far, far worse than Apple. (To be clear, the above is regarding Apple's engineering specifically, not about their business practices. I agree that Apple's competitors are generally far better at parts supply and general right-to-repair matters.)
        techrat 5y ago
        Funny because I've never had problems with, what is commonly accepted as the lowest of the three you mentioned: Acer, like I have with Apple. I have an old Chromebook C710 that just. will. not. die. My Partner's newer Macbook only has one working USB port now. There are more Apple products in my product history graveyard than everything else. Combined. I've long come to the conclusion that people simply treated their Apple devices better and not that they actually were higher quality or better engineered.
        simondotau 5y ago
        Fascinating. My own experience has been exactly the opposite. Every single Apple product I've ever bought has worked perfectly for their entire useful life. My own Apple graveyard is a stack of devices in perfect working condition. Whereas I'm looking at my pile of non-Apple devices and every single one of them had to be repaired, replaced or abandoned due to hardware failures. I've had to replace numerous Lenovo tablets and the last (expensive!) Dell laptop I bought started randomly crashing upon resume from sleep. And don't get me started on the Microsoft Surface Book. My partner (who worked at Microsoft) chose this as their work laptop. Junk. Driver problems. DRIVER PROBLEMS on MICROSOFT'S own hardware, managed by MICROSOFT'S own IT department.
    - markdown 5y ago
      That's an outdated perception. Look up flexgate. Apple acknowledged that they built faulty hardware, and yet still won't fix my laptop. Fuck 'em.
    - omega3 5y ago
      Surely this is a joke
- judge2020 5y ago
  As far as I can tell other manufacturers don't do any direct-to-consumer sales either - Honda seems to basically be a middleman to selling you parts that your local dealership has in-stock.
  - topkai22 5y ago
    That is because, for historical reasons, they are generally not legally able to. Tesla has actually done great work pushing back on the requirements many states had to franchise automobile sales. However, almost every existing manufacturer has the entire country divided up into franchises and it is a legal nightmare to unpack it.
  - roflchoppa 5y ago
    I’m a little confused by this statement; but here are my service options for my datsun. I can order parts from my local dealer, an online dealer, (and I’ve never tried it but I assume from Nissan), and finally the Nissan Motorsports department. If Tesla chooses to have no dealerships, then I have to go to them for support. If I go to a dealership and get ripped off, I can call the manufacturer and they can assist with the problem. Happened to our TSX when the motor was burning oil and the guy who was at the parts shop was saying it was within spec. I had to get a support representative from Honda involved with the repair.
  - garmaine 5y ago
    They provide parts to more than just dealerships. There are plenty of auto parts warehouses you can order OEM parts from.
iamcreasy 5y ago
This 2017 news from electrek[1] contradicts your claim. [1]: https://electrek.co/2017/01/30/tesla-opening-up-service-replacement-parts/ https://electrek.co/2017/01/30/tesla-opening-up-service-repl...
- xmprt 5y ago
  Electrek is a very biased website in favor of electric vehicles so it makes sense they would say positive things about Tesla. Also, the first sentence of that article is about how this is only a thing in Massachusetts because of right to repair laws. If Tesla could, they would brick or make certain systems not operational if you don't use first party parts.
  - iamcreasy 5y ago
    I agree that Electrek is biased, but they usually provide substantive materials in terms of source and quotes to backup their claim. Also, it is a 2017 article, and things have improved since then. For example, Tesla has released their parts catalog for all models. Things are still far from prefect though, as you still can not buy those parts. Hopefully with this new Right to Repair Executive order - this situation will improve.
    - olyjohn 5y ago
      What good is a parts catalog if you can't buy the parts?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

stevev 5y ago

Hack fix are subjective. That same logic can be applied to any car makes. Repairs are not a black box. They’re not using duck tape. A fix is a fix

kube-system 5y ago
If you take an engineered system and apply a non-engineered fix, I'd say it's a hack, even if it works. Did this person do a metallurgical/chemical engineering analysis before changing the material type? OEMs do this on their cooling systems. No, they used a standard off-the-shelf fitting out of convenience. Will it work? Probably. Is it a compromise in terms of engineering design and testing? absolutely. Mind you, Tesla owns this car, and they probably would like to keep it in the condition in which they lent it out.
- ethbr0 5y ago
  I think some of the outrage is Tesla owning the car, but essentially demanding the renter keep it in like-new condition. Legally subject to the terms of the lease, of course. But it feels unfair not to accept normal wear and tear and reasonable repair.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    Lease monthly payments are charges for depreciation plus profit, so they do expect you to keep it in like-new condition. Tesla's screw-up was giving the customer the car and not verifying that they have comprehensive insurance, which is what Tesla relies on for keeping it like-new.
    - kube-system 5y ago
      I bet they do have comprehensive insurance, but their insurance company told them that this is a collision loss. Just read my policy, which is written by a very large insurer -- and this would, in fact, be a collision loss under mine.

mschild 5y ago

Sure, except Tesla has a history of performing just as janky repairs on their cars themselves. Its even stated in the article.[0] Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? Driving around with a shoddy fix on a combustion engine can be just as dangerous. Yet, there are plenty independent mechanics that do a great job because they have access to OEM parts and manuals. [0] https://www.thedrive.com/tech/36274/tesla-model-y-owners-find-cooling-system-cobbled-together-with-home-depot-grade-fake-wood https://www.thedrive.com/tech/36274/tesla-model-y-owners-fin...

belval 5y ago
> Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? The quote is to replace the whole battery pack so I really doubt that they are making a profit on it since it's one of the actually expensive part of the car. As GP pointed out this is hardly right to repair, if Tesla quoted a whole pack that means there aren't any official operating procedures to replace to fix that part without replacing it while you can 100% blame Tesla for that, right-to-repair is about making parts available to do official repair, it's not about letting you figure out clever fixes on your car.
- sleepybrett 5y ago
  Not only did they quote a whole battery pack for this simple repair, but the guy should have the right to keep the 'broken' battery pack (as a backup after he got it repaired) since he is buying a new one for full price. But tesla was refusing that as well.
  - cobookman 5y ago
    Especially since the used battery pack would likely fetch 11k+ on ebay.
- deleted 5y ago

mulmen 5y ago

When I rent a car I am not responsible for repairs. If I am on the hook for the repair bill I should get a choice in how the car is repaired. I can buy whatever tires I want for a leased car. If Tesla wants to make these kinds of demands then the repair should be part of the warranty and priced in to the car. > I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy it, don’t! This holds true for any depreciating asset. If the asset depreciates what's the benefit in buying it? The fact that cars depreciate seems like the best reason to "rent" them. The manufacturer ends up dealing with the now less valuable asset.

yarky 5y ago
Not the OP but "If you can’t buy it, don’t!" might mean not owning/renting it. Either buy it or don't even think about it.
- mulmen 5y ago
  Why though? What if renting makes more sense for my use case? Why not leave the dealer/bank on the hook for the depreciation and maintenance?
  - kuratkull 5y ago
    The dealer/bank are running a profitable business. They are not on the hook for anything, you are paying for it all.
    - mulmen 5y ago
      When I lease a new car repairs happen under the warranty. The manufacturer is “on the hook” for fixing the car. Not necessarily because it is leased but because it is under warranty. Leases are a way to always have a car that is under warranty. You are replying to a counter argument to the claim that leases are always a bad idea.
      - lolinder 5y ago

Pyramus 5y ago

If you watch the video [1] Chad (former Tesla repair technician) clearly states it's the issue is due to cost effectiveness not whether the car is under lease. It's also not constrained the nose that was damaged here - whenever a part of the battery pack is damaged (could be a single cell) Tesla will replace the whole battery pack but not the part. I believe Chad calls it "assembly replacement". It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts, and do the (dis-)assembly. Which is exactly why we need right to repair. [1] https://youtu.be/vVSw3KSevEc?t=1415 https://youtu.be/vVSw3KSevEc?t=1415

wnevets 5y ago
> It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts Surely its more cost effective for the customer that requires this repair?
- Pyramus 5y ago
  Absolutely - when I say cost effective I'm talking on behalf of the company of course.
majormajor 5y ago
Does Tesla then have a separate workflow that re-uses the components of the "broken" 16K battery pack? Seems like that is necessary in order for spending an extra 15K in parts to be worth more than training some more people to repair them... but then in that case, the sticker price of the repair also doesn't seem like it should be 16k, since Tesla's taking the old battery and capturing that side of the value too.
vfclists 5y ago
> It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts, and do the (dis-)assembly. Which is exactly why we need right to repair. I think he means "Its not cost effective "for Tesla" to train staff, have facilities and parts ..."
ErikVandeWater 5y ago
I thought a big part of the pack being made of modular cells is that the software can disengage cells that are problematic and you can keep running with the 999 remaining cells?

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

>I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy it, don’t! This holds true for any depreciating asset. If it flies, floats... The calculation on whether to lease or buy is a little more complicated than can be captured with rules of thumb.

passivate 5y ago

>that they won’t accept a hack fix (however safe it may be) - that car is going to be sold to someone once the lease expires, they just can’t take the risk But why are you calling it a hack fix? Also, why would a competent third-party repair shop be "risky"? A customer should be free to pick out an experienced and competent repair-shop just the way they currently do for their cars. And if they don't want to, they can take it to the dealership like they would have anyway. Right to repair is an extra _option_ for the consumer. Manufacturers are taking it away for future guaranteed service income (ala subscription model). In my opinion, it has absolutely nothing to do with "risk". > that car is going to be sold to someone once the lease expires, they just can’t take the risk How is the risk different from the existing leased model in any industry?

toomuchtodo 5y ago
> A customer should be free to pick out an experienced and competent repair-shop just the way they currently do for their cars. And if they don't want to, they can take it to the dealership like they would have anyway. I would agree, as long as that third party has insurance in the event their fix (due to work performed on the high voltage battery pack) causes a failure resulting in the loss of the vehicle and liability from that failure event. In this specific case, I hope Mr. Benoit or his garage has robust liability coverage (at least $1M, hopefully more), especially if a failure event happens while the vehicle is fast DC charging or charging in someone's home overnight. (disclosure: Tesla owner who performs his own work)
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Your peddling FUD. Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make you liable for anything that something does in perpetuity unless there is evidence that it's actually your fault. Homeowners insurance covers the fire. They probably don't go after anyone unless they have specific reason to believe the loss was probably caused by a pattern of action that could result in a winnable lawsuit (good luck figuring that out when you have a melted lump of car to to work with). If someone does somehow go after the shop their insurance goes to bat for them and digs up all the reasons they're not liable and this was a reasonable repair that their customer performed.

busterarm 5y ago

Plans for future Tesla vehicles are for the batteries to be structural. As in non-replaceable. In that future and without right to repair, a crack in this tiny plastic hose fitting would total the car (heck, depending on your insurer, this already does). Remember that car insurance costs are pooled. This kind of behavior makes _everyone's_ driving more expensive.

vfclists 5y ago
Who is to say that the insurance company owners don't have shares in Tesla?
drtgh 5y ago
It seems Tesla, Inc. makes most of the profit by selling Carbon-Emissions Credits to other vehicles manufacturers. I would not be surprised if they expects from that future making extra profit by "recycling" damaged structures, or something related to such structure. Something for cover the decline in carbon-emissions sales in such future. Anyway, I think that is called "Programed obsolescence". It's like when led bulbs suddenly fails, you know it can be repaired, even you know how to replace the bad quality capacitor chosen by the manufacturer, but the plastic encapsulation prevents it. Programed obsolescence + prevent to repair.
- simondotau 5y ago
  Tesla's core business of car manufacturing is extremely profitable. Their automotive gross margin is substantially higher than most of their competitors, including the likes of Mercedes and BMW. It's only after you add on the costs of growth (capital expenditure, R&D, etc) that overall company profits become marginal. This is because Tesla is doing exactly what you'd expect from a company undergoing rapid growth: they're spending every dollar they can on growing. Yes, Tesla have received a windfall of cash from credit sales, but all these have done is turbocharged their growth spending. If they didn't have this extra cash, they probably would have had to wait 12 months before beginning construction in either Berlin or Texas.
simondotau 5y ago

Aeolun 5y ago

I don’t get this. If I’m leasing the car, why would I be on the hook for the repair? The whole point of paying the lease premium is that you aren’t.

brewdad 5y ago
I hope you aren't currently leasing any vehicles. If you are, and this is your understanding of how leases work, you REALLY need to reread the contract. Tesla is in no way responsible for repairing this car under these circumstances.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  That depends entirely on what is in your contract. I’m not currently leasing, but any I can get here automatically has me pay for insurance too. I think that’s a fairly smart idea, exactly to avoid issues like this.
djrogers 5y ago
No, that’s not the point at all. In fact with any lease you are required to carry insurance to cover accidents like this. The person in question did not have said insurance.

mathfailure 5y ago

No, not stretch at all. If it's up to company to choose how their car (that they rented to someone) needs to be repaired - it should either be done by their expenses to be fair. Otherwise they will always just choose the most expensive way (like 10x, 100x, unlimited x) and that won't be fair at all. A car is just an utility, that's not a unique piece of art, such matters should be regulated, a price of $16k for a repair that can be done 10 fold cheaper is just not fair.

datavirtue 5y ago

That fix was totally legit. I would considered the car better after having threaded in a brass nipple to replace the piece of crap that broke. This feels like a classic repair rip off and they were fishing for a customer who had more money than brains.

dheera 5y ago

> if you rent a car Renting and leasing are different. If it really is a rental they should be able to return the car at any time and stop payments at no cost. They should not have to foot the bill for repair unless it was due to negligence. That's the whole point of renting.

novok 5y ago

If I rent an apartment and the landlord doesn't fix something, I can fix it with my own repairman and charge them the bill. There is nothing special about renting.

Chris2048 5y ago
If the pipes in an apartment fail, the building won't murder someone on the highway.
- lexs 5y ago
  Electrical fires, mold, etc etc there is enough things can be dangerous and harmful in an apartment.
  - Chris2048 5y ago
    to people on the highway?
    - novok 5y ago
      To others in the apartment, and potentially, the entire neighborhood if a fire gets bad enough. Don't be so literal.
      - Chris2048 5y ago
        Don't be so literal? You want me to abstract enough so that you're right? car and house insurance are different. Trying for spurious similarities to suggest otherwise bears no useful insights.

kevin_thibedeau 5y ago

Magnuson-Moss forces them to accept third party fixes. I's been law for 45 years. The current state of affairs with monopolistic control over servicing eliminates competition and allows them to gouge on repairs like this. It is exactly what RTR is trying to fix.

beiller 5y ago

If the customer is willing to take the risk, and the repair shop takes on liability, why would Tesla care? Brand image? This is already negatively affecting their brand image (for me).

rurounijones 5y ago
Because Tesla owns the car (It is a leased car) and want it fixed according to the manufacturer's specifications (which happens to be them). It is not an unreasonable request. However I completely understand the complaints people are making about repairability and insurance shennanigans etc.

crmrc114 5y ago

Mate, your talking about a brass nipple being threaded into a broken plastic part to replace a plastic reducer that was [probably] poorly ultrasonic welded in place. What I see in the article is a common sense repair. Anyone who turns a wrench is laughing at the Tesla fanboy pearl clutching over this. Not an attack on your post btw, just a general statement that every Tesla owner comes out of the cracks in these posts and talks about how magical their cars are and how they are so advanced that no one could possibly understand them. The SAE has programs and industry standards on EV's- every other car manufacturer works with aftermarket shops. Teslas are not made of magic pixie dust and rainbows. The Gen1 tesla roadster was all Toyota parts. Their advanced motor technology is based on reluctance motors invented in the late 1800's. Tossing tcp/ip in your car as a bus [vs much better industrial protocols] and a vfd and calling something groundbreaking does not make it so. You should have access to the documentation and parts- I and many other gear heads will refuse to drive/own/buy any Tesla car until I can turn a wrench on it. How would you feel if I told you only Dell/HP should make computers because people make dangerous repairs that will allow hackers to attack systems? It's just as ridiculous when people make claims that fixing a busted fitting is a 'hack'. imho Tesla Autos are straight-up 'unauthorised bread'.

alrs 5y ago
Tesla stockholders, not Tesla owners, but yes.
- Larrikin 5y ago
  It took a while to realize irrational defenses of Elon Musk/Tesla and down voting nearly anything negative about either were tied to the large number of people here who have invested significant sums in the stock and not so much a cult of personality.
mulmen 5y ago
The Gen 1 Tesla Roadster was a license built Lotus Elise. The Lotus Elise had a Toyota motor, the Tesla was all electric, what other Toyota parts are you talking about? Did they also use Toyota accessories?

gameswithgo 5y ago

In the usa there is established law that a car maker cannot void the warranty just because of a repair or modification you did. They have to prove that what you did actually caused the problem. For minor issues dealers will often screw you anyway, but when facing a 16k bill you could certainly lawyer up a little

craig131 5y ago

Kind of bad faith to throw rent in there, of course right to repair doesn't mean you have the right to repair rented things.

lolinder 5y ago
Why is it bad faith? The article is about a guy who leased a Tesla.

dexterdog 5y ago

Fine, then Tesla should not be charging the price of a full battery replacement plus labor for the fix since they are getting a full battery that can be very simply refurbished and then sold as such.

causality0 5y ago

Do you have a right to reasonable charges for damage of rented items? If you rent a jackhammer and break the trigger is it fair to charge the customer five hundred dollars to repair a ten dollar piece of plastic? If you rent a wedding dress and rip a seam should you be expected to pay a fashion designer for the stitching? Nobody would ever rent anything if every object was a minefield of potential absurd over-charges.

errno22222 5y ago

Isn't the universal saying if it drives, flies or fcuks rent it, don't buy it? I believe commonly attribute to Buffett but I never verified source.

hellbannedguy 5y ago

You are absolutely right, and I am a huge Right to Repair guy. I hope people that lease vechicles see this. (I was under the assumption that all leases had to have full coverage auto insurance before you even signed the lease? And yes--on most insurance policies road hazard insurance is extra, but just assumed on a lease it would be included. I still remember the battle axe who kept questioning me over a broken windshield. She wouldn't shut up, until I mentioned CA has an Insurance Commissioner.)

neximo64 5y ago

Are you a fan of tesla by any chance?

ineedasername 5y ago

The article seems to imply that Tesla can very well fix this issue, but they don't train & equip their service centers to maintain the battery. When the lease is turned in, it will just have to go back to the factory. Destination/freight charges on a car are often about $1200, and this was otherwise a simple fix. If Tesla feels the need to charge the customer for using a 3rd party repair service that recreated a stronger version of the original fittings then the current owner will still have saved about $14,000, AND all of.your concerns will have been addressed.

nwallin 5y ago

Is Tesla demanding that they actually fix it their way? From the article it reads as if he took it to the dealer to get it repaired, they quoted him $16k, so he took it somewhere else. I could be wrong though.

CogitoCogito 5y ago

> A bit of a stretch to classify this under right to repair.. if you rent a car from tesla, it’s going to be up to tesla to choose how it’s repaired. So you're cool with Tesla choosing to repair it for 30k? For 100k? Where does this stop? > And it doesn’t seem unreasonable that they won’t accept a hack fix (however safe it may be) - that car is going to be sold to someone once the lease expires, they just can’t take the risk What do you mean by "however safe it can be"? If it's as safe as Tesla's other repair method, then there is no increase in risk.

pjc50 5y ago

Hang on, if it's rented, why is the rentor liable for the repair? Is this where we get into a discussion of damage waivers and insurance excesses?

sschueller 5y ago

"hack fix". Have you seen some of the garbage hacks Tesla put in the cars they sold as new? 3d printed parts[1] and I am not talking about industrial 3d prints. These prints look like they come of a $200 home printer. [1] https://www.sculpteo.com/blog/2020/04/29/tesla-replaces-flawed-car-components-using-3d-printing/ https://www.sculpteo.com/blog/2020/04/29/tesla-replaces-flaw...

IkmoIkmo 5y ago

I also don't really get how this works, it's a lease. In my country a lease includes all payments except fuel. That means the car, the insurance, the taxes. If anything happens (outside of you wilfully ramming the car into something), it's covered by the lease. The car company makes sure to get insured and may seek payout from their insurance company, but you're not involved. That puts the onus on the car company to look for the cheapest but most effective maintenance and repairs. If they're routinely paying $16k for an $800 repair, the average cost of tesla leases would go up by a bit to the point they're not competitive in lease pricing versus others who get it done for the $800. And any car manufacturer which creates a system that inflates repair prices for whatever reason, would be similarly unfavourable for leasing. If this was a personal car, very different story. Now you have an individual getting screwed 75% of the cost of the car for a minor plastic replacement, with no recourse. Here you need right to repair. But for lease companies it all averages out, lease prices are positioned based on that average, and if the average is consistently high, Tesla is just disqualifying themselves from the market. There's no need for a legal framework to solve that when there's plenty of market incentives already. But somehow for this guy it wasn't covered, but the solution seems to me not to have right to unlicensed repair of a car that another company owns, but rather that the lease contract (particularly insurance coverage) was poor and should've had coverage for stuff like this. That responsibility lies with the consumer, but because insurance can be technical and hard to understand, I'm entirely in favour of more mandatory insurances for consumer protection. But that's often not a popular take on HN. (we just had a discussion a week ago about mandatory insurance being too high in the US).