Tesla agrees to pay $1.5 million in class action battery-throttling lawsuit, vehicle owners...

midian182

Posts: 7,085   +62
Staff member
In brief: Tesla will pay 1,743 Model S sedan owners in the US $625 as part of a $1.5 million settlement over claims a software update temporarily reduced their vehicles' maximum battery voltage, leading to a class-action lawsuit against the EV giant.

CNBC writes that the OTA update arrived in 2019 after a Model S caught fire in Hong Kong. Tesla said the update, pushed out over an "abundance of caution," would revise charge and thermal management settings on Model S and Model X vehicles.

But one Model S owner, David Rasmussen, said that the update had reduced the vehicles' battery charging speed, maximum capacity, and range temporarily. The matter went to court in August 2019.

Lawyers for the owners who sued said (via Reuters) that the "voltage limitation was temporary, with a 10% reduction lasting about three months, and a smaller 7% reduction lasting another seven months before the corrective update was released in March 2020."

Tesla released another update that restored around 3% of the battery voltage, with a third update arriving in March 2020 that fully restored the batteries' voltage. According to court filings, 1,552 of the affected vehicles had their max battery voltage restored, while 57 vehicles received battery replacements. Other Tesla owners who experienced battery throttling should see their Model S's maximum voltage restored as they continue to drive the cars.

The $1.5 million settlement includes $410,000 fees and costs for the plaintiffs' attorneys. Owners can expect just $625, which is "many times the prorated value of the temporarily reduced maximum voltage," according to the settlement documents. Engadget notes that affected owners in Norway can expect up to $16,000, the result of a lawsuit in the country over the same issue.

As part of the settlement, Tesla must also "maintain diagnostic software for in-warranty vehicles to notify owners and lessees of vehicles that Tesla determines may need battery service or repair for certain battery issues."

Permalink to story.

 

Uncle Al

Posts: 8,167   +6,925
This whole issue that Tesla spawned, of limiting capacity, range, etc unless the owners fork out more $$ should be addressed full on. Milking customers of their hard earned cash will continue to get worse unless the courts take a solid stand on this and similar issues. Just another way that an otherwise brilliant inventor is reduced to a plain old everyday thief.

His latest "promise" that has taken years for him to keep is supposed to create the Model 2, a vehicle selling for under $30K but you can bet he will find want to jack the price up and squeeze every dime out of the potential customers. We can only hope that the "big three" are able to produce more competitive vehicles without all the high cost frills. There are a few out there but the prices are still too high, especially when you consider that an electric car costs far less to build than a standard, gas burning vehicle.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,732   +2,049
TechSpot Elite
This whole issue that Tesla spawned, of limiting capacity, range, etc unless the owners fork out more $$ should be addressed full on. Milking customers of their hard earned cash will continue to get worse unless the courts take a solid stand on this and similar issues. Just another way that an otherwise brilliant inventor is reduced to a plain old everyday thief.

His latest "promise" that has taken years for him to keep is supposed to create the Model 2, a vehicle selling for under $30K but you can bet he will find want to jack the price up and squeeze every dime out of the potential customers. We can only hope that the "big three" are able to produce more competitive vehicles without all the high cost frills. There are a few out there but the prices are still too high, especially when you consider that an electric car costs far less to build than a standard, gas burning vehicle.
I don't believe that the "big three" have the competence to take on Tesla at that level (well, maybe Ford). Nothing that they've done post-1976 has instilled any confidence in them with me (except Ford not needing a bailout). I find it far more likely that companies like Toyota, Honda, Hyundai and Kia will be the ones to successfully take on Tesla. Those companies have a far superior management philosophy than pretty much every other automaker in the world (although Toyota has been faltering lately).
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,404   +4,743
I don't believe that the "big three" have the competence to take on Tesla at that level (well, maybe Ford). Nothing that they've done post-1976 has instilled any confidence in them with me (except Ford not needing a bailout). I find it far more likely that companies like Toyota, Honda, Hyundai and Kia will be the ones to successfully take on Tesla. Those companies have a far superior management philosophy than pretty much every other automaker in the world (although Toyota has been faltering lately).
At least Toyota is proactive in addressing safety/recalls, in the US at least. Other manufacturers that sell vehicles in the US seem to need to have their arms twisted by the relevant authorities to issue recalls it they issue them at all.

I do not think that Toyota is necessarily following the best "green" path, but speaking as an '06 Prius owner contemplating a Prius Prime for my next vehicle - I don't think anyone else on the market has as compelling of a vehicle, for me, anyway, as the Prius Prime.

Toyota has, to the best of my knowledge, never played the same kind of games that Tesla plays with the "premium features" Tesla offers. Tesla reminds me of the games telephone companies were playing with voice mail early on. Pay so much for this many messages that may be stored, and fork over even more for us to store X more messages. IMO, Tesla has been far worse in that the premium paid is substantial.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,404   +4,743
This whole issue that Tesla spawned, of limiting capacity, range, etc unless the owners fork out more $$ should be addressed full on. Milking customers of their hard earned cash will continue to get worse unless the courts take a solid stand on this and similar issues. Just another way that an otherwise brilliant inventor is reduced to a plain old everyday thief.

His latest "promise" that has taken years for him to keep is supposed to create the Model 2, a vehicle selling for under $30K but you can bet he will find want to jack the price up and squeeze every dime out of the potential customers. We can only hope that the "big three" are able to produce more competitive vehicles without all the high cost frills. There are a few out there but the prices are still too high, especially when you consider that an electric car costs far less to build than a standard, gas burning vehicle.
Personally, I think there is little doubt that other, "mature", automobile manufacturers will give Tesla some very stiff competition. They already know how to manufacture automobiles. Converting to EVs will mostly be a matter of retooling for them.
 

captaincranky

Posts: 17,221   +5,977
His latest "promise" that has taken years for him to keep is supposed to create the Model 2, a vehicle selling for under $30K but you can bet he will find want to jack the price up and squeeze every dime out of the potential customers
If there exists such a thing as a "gentleman's gentleman", then by inverse analog, Musk would have to be a, "douche bag's douche bag".

Gee, I wonder if I'll hear any flak for saying that. :rolleyes:
 

JKnight

Posts: 152   +225
Car companies will fight tooth and nail to prevent recalling cars knowing that it might cost millions to fix. Why not build them right in the first place?? Spending more money on engineering and testing is sometimes cheaper then paying for recalls. I am still waiting for Tesla to launch a subscription service for unlocking extra range for a monthly fee.
 

DaveBG

Posts: 572   +252
Imagine what kind of person you have to be to try to brush off money from a company that is saving your lungs ... sad. At least the fine is minimal. The court did not bought the bull...
 

Lounds

Posts: 900   +800
I don't believe that the "big three" have the competence to take on Tesla at that level (well, maybe Ford). Nothing that they've done post-1976 has instilled any confidence in them with me (except Ford not needing a bailout). I find it far more likely that companies like Toyota, Honda, Hyundai and Kia will be the ones to successfully take on Tesla. Those companies have a far superior management philosophy than pretty much every other automaker in the world (although Toyota has been faltering lately).
BMW is one to watch, Jaguar has already made a deal to use their electric platform for their new range of cars.
VAG has lots of different car brands and a wider audience in Europe than the ones you have mentioned. VW has been planting the seed of its ID. Range for the last few years, I keep seeing them daily in the UK now.
Toyota if anything are one of the few companies to drag their feet on making an EV platform. Their hybrid platform exists to keep their engine manufacturing to continue.
 

captaincranky

Posts: 17,221   +5,977
I do not think that Toyota is necessarily following the best "green" path, but speaking as an '06 Prius owner contemplating a Prius Prime for my next vehicle - I don't think anyone else on the market has as compelling of a vehicle, for me, anyway, as the Prius Prime.
Considering the state of flux the auto industry is in, and the availability of charging stations at present, I think Hybrids are, "the best idea ever".
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,732   +2,049
TechSpot Elite
At least Toyota is proactive in addressing safety/recalls, in the US at least. Other manufacturers that sell vehicles in the US seem to need to have their arms twisted by the relevant authorities to issue recalls it they issue them at all.

I do not think that Toyota is necessarily following the best "green" path, but speaking as an '06 Prius owner contemplating a Prius Prime for my next vehicle - I don't think anyone else on the market has as compelling of a vehicle, for me, anyway, as the Prius Prime.

Toyota has, to the best of my knowledge, never played the same kind of games that Tesla plays with the "premium features" Tesla offers. Tesla reminds me of the games telephone companies were playing with voice mail early on. Pay so much for this many messages that may be stored, and fork over even more for us to store X more messages. IMO, Tesla has been far worse in that the premium paid is substantial.
I'm sorry, I should have been more specific when I said that Toyota's management philosophy has been faltering as of late. Toyota has been throwing their badges on cars that have been produced by others when it comes to sporty and/or sports cars. First we had the Subaru BRZ which was re-named the Scion FR-S:
546cb26136ae1_-_2014-scion-fr-s-coupe-engineering-prototype-lg.jpg

I remember thinking to myself "Well, at least they didn't call it a Celica".

But then Toyota committed the ultimate sacrilege, the betrayal of perhaps Toyota's most legendary marquee name. They did this by taking a BMW Z4 hardtop, fidgeting with the front bumper a bit, and having the gall to call a car made by BMW, a Supra. The level of cringe involved there is just staggering:
434700-une-toyota-supra-manuelle-serait-enfin-en-preparation.jpeg

Toyota's engineering, ergonomics, durability and reliability has been second-to-none since the 1980s. Toyota used to care about how people perceived their marques like Camry, Corolla, Celica and Supra. To just out-source the manufacture of a marquee name is not just lazy, it's downright stupid.

To those who think that the tech press are nothing more than industry apologists, you should see automotive publications because other than Consumer Reports, they're ALL apologists and it's completely shameless. Car&Driver, Road&Track, Motor Trend, etc. all fall over themselves to try to make a complete dud seem interesting. I can just imagine the field day that Top Gear would've had with this abomination.

I read some article somewhere (with a clearly compromised author) who had the gall to say "Very unexpectedly, the new Supra has very poor sales numbers." It wasn't unexpected to me, someone who has been a Supra fanatic since the (relatively ugly) Mark I. This author (and Toyota for that matter) couldn't seem to get it through their skull(s) that someone who wants a Supra, by definition, DOESN'T WANT a BMW and someone looking for a BMW half-wants it for the BMW badge on it. That leaves the Supra (or as I like to call it, the Toyota Axis) as an orphaned vehicle and perhaps the most harebrained, bone-headed, (and any other synonym for stupid you can think of) decision that Toyota has made since they tried (unsuccessfully) to sell the Chevrolet Cavalier in Japan as the Toyota Cavalier:
AR-302069935.jpg

Toyota's upper management needs to get it through their collective skulls that when people are looking to buy a Toyota, they want to BUY A TOYOTA! They're not interested in a non-Toyota with a Toyota badge.

Those are three absolutely horrible major decisions made by Toyota's management and that, specifically, is where they've faltered (and badly).
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,732   +2,049
TechSpot Elite
BMW is one to watch, Jaguar has already made a deal to use their electric platform for their new range of cars.
VAG has lots of different car brands and a wider audience in Europe than the ones you have mentioned. VW has been planting the seed of its ID. Range for the last few years, I keep seeing them daily in the UK now.
Toyota if anything are one of the few companies to drag their feet on making an EV platform. Their hybrid platform exists to keep their engine manufacturing to continue.
Toyota seems to be more focused on their fuel-cell tech.