6 ms·
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 le
by 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 agoLease 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 agoI 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.
- asdfaoeu 5y agoThey didn't have comprehensive insurance but Tesla didn't verify it's mentioned in the video.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- kube-system 5y agoCollision with an object in the road should be a collision claim anywhere in the US that I’m aware of. Maybe he’s confusing the two.
- ethbr0 5y agoDepreciation is variable though, and dependent on fair market value at lease termination. If Tesla designed the car with a part and sold said part, everyone would be better off: Tesla (less risk of catastrophic repair expenses), insurance companies (lower repair costs, less variability), and the customer (cheaper repairs and insurance). I get that's not a trivial request, but other car manufacturers manage the task.