4 ms·

How can a potential buyer verify that a used Tesla they are considering purchasing is not subject to some sort of pullback like this? I feel like there's an in

How can a potential buyer verify that a used Tesla they are considering purchasing is not subject to some sort of pullback like this? I feel like there's an information asymmetry between the used car buyer (who has likely never owned a Tesla before, and certainly doesn't know the history of the vehicle he's considering purchasing), the seller (who may specifically be aware that the car appears to have functionality that could be revoked at a later date), and Tesla (who have records of what has been paid for). What are the right questions for a buyer to ask in order to ensure they're not left in this unfortunate position?

thrown_22 4y ago
>Should I be buying a car from a company that thinks I'm leasing a car? Seems like the most obvious first question.
dylan604 4y ago
>What are the right questions for a buyer to ask in order to ensure they're not left in this unfortunate position? Just a few spit balls for you: Do you have another used car for sale that is not a Tesla? Does this Tesla have any features currently enabled that might be disabled when someone realizes I'm no longer the original owner or the current owner realizes their credit card is still paying for services they no longer use, etc? In what ways will Tesla fuck me after purchasing this car?
- toomuchtodo 4y ago
  You could just as easily get screwed by GM, Ford, or any other legacy automaker. Your remedies are always legal or regulatory in nature, and you can’t rely on brand alone to ensure a satisfactory ownership experience.
  - dylan604 4y ago
    I've never had a legacy car that could over-the-air disable things. Maybe OnStar or similar could do something, but not like the level that Tesla took things. You're "remedies are always legal" is a bit flat. Tell to the parent that is in a rush to take their 2.34 kids to school before heading to work that they need to contact a lawyer before starting their day. And when is the last time a call to a lawyer fixed anything within any kind of quick turn time? So now you're without a car until lawyers "fix" things.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - toomuchtodo 4y ago
      I agree we need better laws around right to repair and what “ownership” means when software and telematics are involved.
    - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
      > when is the last time a call to a lawyer fixed anything within any kind of quick turn time? This May when my landlord was taking a piss with his obligations. A single letter set him staight real fast.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    > You could just as easily get screwed by GM, Ford, or any other legacy automaker That is purely hypothetical, however -- as far as I know, this kind of stunt has only become a thing since Tesla started doing it. Chevy wants to reduce the capacity of my wife's Bolt by 20%, but they are asking for her permission to do that, not just sending an OTA update to do it against her wishes. When I look at what car to buy, I am not going to care so much about regulations or legal ramifications, I'm going to look primarily at how likely it is that I will have to resort to those remedies in the future because the manufacturer likes to modify already-sold vehicles after the fact without even asking. Stunts like this are why we are looking at a Mach-E to replace my wife's Bolt, not a Model Y.
    - gnicholas 4y ago
      I'm not in line for a Tesla either, and the Mach-E does look nice. Their latent flaw is that they shed range much more than other EVs in cold weather: https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/winter-ev-range-loss https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/winter-ev-range-loss
    - dylan604 4y ago
      Curiosity is too strong. For what reason does Chevy want you to volunteer to lower your capacity?
      - renewiltord 4y ago
        They blow up otherwise. https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/19/gm-tells-bolt-owners-to-park-50-feet-away-from-other-cars-extends-ev-production-halt/ https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/19/gm-tells-bolt-owners-to...
      - enragedcacti 4y ago
        its part of a massive recall on the bolt. They completely halted production for months and months and are now going to recall and replace the battery of every bolt on the road. Before the replacements go in they want owners to agree to have their capacity cut as an extra precaution.
duncan_idaho 4y ago
Tesla wants you to buy a new one
- AlexandrB 4y ago
  Why would I buy a new one if no one will want to buy it from me in 5 years? Sounds like Tesla wants me to buy a new Ford.
  - gnicholas 4y ago
    Tesla's not the only one who pulls shenanigans like this. BMW was charging annually for CarPlay for a while, and now they're testing the same for heated seats. If this trend continues, people will actually want a checklist of things to ask about, and perhaps a contract that says what features were paid for, how, and whether there are any transfer fees so the new owner can use them. Sad state of affairs.
renewiltord 4y ago
Hmm, the Carfax report for the car should show it as what it is originally, right? All features that are not in that should then be considered absent. But that's not a complete list. FSD, etc. won't transfer either. You're right. This would be a useful page on some Tesla owners' wiki.
- gnicholas 4y ago
  It's bigger than just Tesla. Someone should make a site with a checklist for the type of car you're buying, so you know what to ask about. And then have a contract that the seller signs indicating what he paid for and if it will transfer. Think BMW heated seats, for example.
LgWoodenBadger 4y ago
In the US that would be the Monroney Sticker that every new car comes with. Instead of throwing it out, sounds like most new car buyers should keep it as a fundamental record of ownership now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroney_sticker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroney_sticker
- kube-system 4y ago
  I don't understand people who throw away monroney stickers. They fit perfectly in the back of every owners manual pouch.
- gnicholas 4y ago
  What about addons that were purchased later, like FSD or BMW's heated seats? Does a simple receipt do the trick? It feels like we need some way to know that a record was (and still is) valid.

thrown_22 4y ago

>Should I be buying a car from a company that thinks I'm leasing a car? Seems like the most obvious first question.

dylan604 4y ago

>What are the right questions for a buyer to ask in order to ensure they're not left in this unfortunate position? Just a few spit balls for you: Do you have another used car for sale that is not a Tesla? Does this Tesla have any features currently enabled that might be disabled when someone realizes I'm no longer the original owner or the current owner realizes their credit card is still paying for services they no longer use, etc? In what ways will Tesla fuck me after purchasing this car?

toomuchtodo 4y ago
You could just as easily get screwed by GM, Ford, or any other legacy automaker. Your remedies are always legal or regulatory in nature, and you can’t rely on brand alone to ensure a satisfactory ownership experience.
- dylan604 4y ago
  I've never had a legacy car that could over-the-air disable things. Maybe OnStar or similar could do something, but not like the level that Tesla took things. You're "remedies are always legal" is a bit flat. Tell to the parent that is in a rush to take their 2.34 kids to school before heading to work that they need to contact a lawyer before starting their day. And when is the last time a call to a lawyer fixed anything within any kind of quick turn time? So now you're without a car until lawyers "fix" things.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - toomuchtodo 4y ago
    I agree we need better laws around right to repair and what “ownership” means when software and telematics are involved.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    > when is the last time a call to a lawyer fixed anything within any kind of quick turn time? This May when my landlord was taking a piss with his obligations. A single letter set him staight real fast.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  > You could just as easily get screwed by GM, Ford, or any other legacy automaker That is purely hypothetical, however -- as far as I know, this kind of stunt has only become a thing since Tesla started doing it. Chevy wants to reduce the capacity of my wife's Bolt by 20%, but they are asking for her permission to do that, not just sending an OTA update to do it against her wishes. When I look at what car to buy, I am not going to care so much about regulations or legal ramifications, I'm going to look primarily at how likely it is that I will have to resort to those remedies in the future because the manufacturer likes to modify already-sold vehicles after the fact without even asking. Stunts like this are why we are looking at a Mach-E to replace my wife's Bolt, not a Model Y.
  - gnicholas 4y ago
    I'm not in line for a Tesla either, and the Mach-E does look nice. Their latent flaw is that they shed range much more than other EVs in cold weather: https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/winter-ev-range-loss https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/winter-ev-range-loss
  - dylan604 4y ago
    Curiosity is too strong. For what reason does Chevy want you to volunteer to lower your capacity?
    - renewiltord 4y ago
      They blow up otherwise. https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/19/gm-tells-bolt-owners-to-park-50-feet-away-from-other-cars-extends-ev-production-halt/ https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/19/gm-tells-bolt-owners-to...
    - enragedcacti 4y ago
      its part of a massive recall on the bolt. They completely halted production for months and months and are now going to recall and replace the battery of every bolt on the road. Before the replacements go in they want owners to agree to have their capacity cut as an extra precaution.

duncan_idaho 4y ago

Tesla wants you to buy a new one

AlexandrB 4y ago
Why would I buy a new one if no one will want to buy it from me in 5 years? Sounds like Tesla wants me to buy a new Ford.
- gnicholas 4y ago
  Tesla's not the only one who pulls shenanigans like this. BMW was charging annually for CarPlay for a while, and now they're testing the same for heated seats. If this trend continues, people will actually want a checklist of things to ask about, and perhaps a contract that says what features were paid for, how, and whether there are any transfer fees so the new owner can use them. Sad state of affairs.

renewiltord 4y ago

Hmm, the Carfax report for the car should show it as what it is originally, right? All features that are not in that should then be considered absent. But that's not a complete list. FSD, etc. won't transfer either. You're right. This would be a useful page on some Tesla owners' wiki.

gnicholas 4y ago
It's bigger than just Tesla. Someone should make a site with a checklist for the type of car you're buying, so you know what to ask about. And then have a contract that the seller signs indicating what he paid for and if it will transfer. Think BMW heated seats, for example.

LgWoodenBadger 4y ago

In the US that would be the Monroney Sticker that every new car comes with. Instead of throwing it out, sounds like most new car buyers should keep it as a fundamental record of ownership now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroney_sticker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroney_sticker

kube-system 4y ago
I don't understand people who throw away monroney stickers. They fit perfectly in the back of every owners manual pouch.
gnicholas 4y ago
What about addons that were purchased later, like FSD or BMW's heated seats? Does a simple receipt do the trick? It feels like we need some way to know that a record was (and still is) valid.