3 ms·
So this dude was making payments on a $116k car for two years, without having the car? Seems clear some Tesla systems didn’t talk to eachother, and this is Tesl
by mwint 5y ago
So this dude was making payments on a $116k car for two years, without having the car? Seems clear some Tesla systems didn’t talk to eachother, and this is Tesla’s fault.
But it also seems clear this is something a single letter from a lawyer would have fixed. Certainly it’d be cheaper than these payments he’s been making.
- somerandomqaguy 5y agoThe article said the dispute was pushed into mandatory arbitration. Would a letter from a lawyer have any weight whatsoever at that point?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mwint 5y agoThose arbitration clauses aren’t 100% bulletproof. I suspect a lawyer would be able to find a way to have you not pay for a car you returned two years ago, regardless of any arbitration clause.
- joering2 5y agoI think the article is pretty clear - it wasn't about him being force to keep paying.. rather him not wanting to destroy his credit, since bank "didn't have it" that he doesn't own that Tesla because Tesla never submit "stop" letter to the bank that they took over its possession.
- HWR_14 5y ago> it also seems clear this is something a single letter from a lawyer would have fixed. If not to Tesla, then certainly letters to the credit bureaus and then not making the payments would also be cheaper. Who pays for something they returned? You can dispute a fraudulent credit report downgrade. Also, who keeps a returned car insured? Please hold onto my car and destroy it Tesla. I could use a brand new model at your expense.