23 ms·

> The car went through a dealer and was sold certified pre-owned; and it was sold as not having those features. Was the car sold to its original owner with tho

> The car went through a dealer and was sold certified pre-owned; and it was sold as not having those features. Was the car sold to its original owner with those features enabled? If so, it's effectively the same as the original story reported, meaning that Tesla expected to be paid twice for the feature.

RHSeeger 5y ago
As I understand it, - Car was sold to original owner, who enabled the features - Car was sold back to dealer/Tesla (presumably a trade-in?) - Car was sold to second owner, with information that it did not include the features - Turns out the car had the features enabled (they mistakenly forgot to turn them off) - Features remotely disabled There's nothing inherently wrong with Tesla charging both the original and second buyer for the features, as those features make the car worth more. Conceptually, its the same as paying more for a car with a better entertainment system, then the person who buys it next (from the dealer after you trade it in) pays more for it than they would for one without that system.
- detaro 5y ago
  In the story that made the big splash, after > - Car was sold back to dealer/Tesla (presumably a trade-in?) a used-car dealer bought the car from Tesla and was given (legally required) documentation about the car, which indicated the car had the features. Then Tesla removed the features remotely while the car was owned by the dealer, without informing them (because they decided during an audit that it shouldn't have had them). The dealer then showed the documentation to the customer (as required) and sold the car, both sides in the understanding it had the features as documented (because why wouldn't it, if Tesla documented it as such). The final customer then found the features disabled (or being disabled on an update/sync).

23 ms·

> The car went through a dealer and was sold certified pre-owned; and it was sold as not having those features. Was the car sold to its original owner with tho

by DebtDeflation 5y ago

RHSeeger 5y ago
As I understand it, - Car was sold to original owner, who enabled the features - Car was sold back to dealer/Tesla (presumably a trade-in?) - Car was sold to second owner, with information that it did not include the features - Turns out the car had the features enabled (they mistakenly forgot to turn them off) - Features remotely disabled There's nothing inherently wrong with Tesla charging both the original and second buyer for the features, as those features make the car worth more. Conceptually, its the same as paying more for a car with a better entertainment system, then the person who buys it next (from the dealer after you trade it in) pays more for it than they would for one without that system.
- detaro 5y ago
  In the story that made the big splash, after > - Car was sold back to dealer/Tesla (presumably a trade-in?) a used-car dealer bought the car from Tesla and was given (legally required) documentation about the car, which indicated the car had the features. Then Tesla removed the features remotely while the car was owned by the dealer, without informing them (because they decided during an audit that it shouldn't have had them). The dealer then showed the documentation to the customer (as required) and sold the car, both sides in the understanding it had the features as documented (because why wouldn't it, if Tesla documented it as such). The final customer then found the features disabled (or being disabled on an update/sync).