Telsa remotely disables Auto-Pilot on used car it sold at its own auction ...

[Avacee]

Apologies if posted elsewhere - please delete if so

https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/6/21127243/tesla-model-s-autopilot-disabled-remotely-used-car-update

TL;DR. Tesla sold a car at one of its own auctions with "Enhanced Auto-pilot" and "Full Self Driving Mode" Enabled - it was bought by a dealer - the Dealer sold it with those features advertised - in a later over-the-air-update Tesla disabled Auto-Pilot saying the buyer "did not pay for it". Tesla now wants $8,000 to re-enable the features.

Let the lawsuits begin!

Edit: Spelling.

[magic]

I can sort of understand why many people use Silicon Valley's products for free, but why pay for becoming one with the botnet?

[BravoV]

Thats the reason, soul and core of "cloud based" business is.

[Stray Electron]

Apologies if posted elsewhere - please delete if so

https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/6/21127243/tesla-model-s-autopilot-disabled-remotely-used-car-update

TL;DR. Tesla sold a car at one of its own auctions with "Enhanced Auto-pilot" and "Full Self Driving Mode" Enabled - it was bought by a dealer - the Dealer sold it with those features advertised - in a later over-the-air-update Tesla disabled Auto-Pilot saying the buyer "did not pay for it". Tesla now wants $8,000 to re-enable the features.

Let the lawsuits begin!

Edit: Spelling.

    My understanding of Tesla's statement is that NO used (Tesla) car buyer paid for any options so Tesla has the right to disable them, even if they were enabled with the buyer bought the car.

   I wonder how long it will be before Tesla decides that even the original purchaser isn't entitled to those optional features after, say, one year?

   Remind me to NEVER buy a Tesla!  Or any other vehicle that can be reprogrammed without my expressed authorization.

[frogg]

I don't know the full story, but from what I've read:

1. This reduces the residual value of Tesla vehicles.
2. This underscores the importance of alternative self-driving methodologies like Openpilot.

I don't think it makes Tesla bad or good, it just reduces the residual value of the vehicles. Good for some folks, bad for others.

[wraper]

TL;DR. Tesla sold a car at one of its own auctions with "Enhanced Auto-pilot" and "Full Self Driving Mode" Enabled - it was bought by a dealer - the Dealer sold it with those features advertised - in a later over-the-air-update Tesla disabled Auto-Pilot saying the buyer "did not pay for it". Tesla now wants $8,000 to re-enable the features.

TL;DR. Apparently Tesla sold a car to the dealer at one of its own auctions without "Enhanced Auto-pilot" and "Full Self Driving Mode" but in practice it was functioning at the time. And was disabled shortly after but a bit too late so dealer sold it to customer as if car came with AP option.
In any case it should be dealer's who sold the car, not buyer's problem.

[rdl]

Both items were listed right on the sticker as it was sold by Tesla. $8000 was added to the price of the vehicle. They are not "services", they are one-time feature purchases just like any other vehicle option such as A/C, fancy wheels, etc.

[wraper]

Both items were listed right on the sticker as it was sold by Tesla.

Source please.

[wraper]

An invoice from Tesla later revealed that on November 18, three days after the car was sold to the dealer, Tesla conducted an “audit” of the car and decided the features had not been paid for. Consequently when the car received its next software update in December, those features were remotely removed from the vehicle.

[frogg]

An invoice from Tesla later revealed that on November 18, three days after the car was sold to the dealer, Tesla conducted an “audit” of the car and decided the features had not been paid for. Consequently when the car received its next software update in December, those features were remotely removed from the vehicle.

oh shnap...

[rdl]

That's like a dealer saying 3 days after the sale, "Oh by the way, the car we sold you with those fancy aluminum wheels wasn't really supposed to have them, so we sneaked on to your property in the middle of the night and swapped them for some cheap ones."

second picture.

https://jalopnik.com/tesla-remotely-removes-autopilot-features-from-customer-1841472617

[TerminalJack505]

After reading the Jalopnik article, it seems obvious to me that this episode has just one of two outcomes: 1) Tesla enables the features, or, 2) Tesla refunds $8000 to the end-buyer. 

It was Tesla's auction and the features were listed right on the sticker.  End of story.

[wraper]

second picture.

https://jalopnik.com/tesla-remotely-removes-autopilot-features-from-customer-1841472617

That's certainly not sticker car came with but some Photoshop reproduction at best. Also that's a price of a brand new car, not 2 year old used car. And if it is an accurate reproduction of an actual sticker present on a car, it was there since the car was new. I'd like to see an invoice of how much dealer actually paid to Tesla, and which options are present there. Again it should be dealer's problem. Either they take the car back, pay to Tesla for AP or compensate to the buyer.

[wraper]

After reading the Jalopnik article, it seems obvious to me that this episode has just one of two outcomes: 1) Tesla enables the features, or, 2) Tesla refunds $8000 to the end-buyer. 

It was Tesla's auction and the features were listed right on the sticker.  End of story.

No, buyer and Tesla do nothing. Dealer solves the problem.

2) Tesla refunds $8000 to the end-buyer. 

Tesla is not the seller in this case and buyer paid nothing to them.

[maginnovision]

Did the original owner get to transfer his license over? Assuming he bought another tesla. If not that's shitty on Tesla. If he did it's just poor communication.

[wraper]

IMHO dealer simply plays dumb in this case.

[wraper]

So by the time car was sold there was no AP already  . And Dealer certainly plays dumb. Note he never says that he purchased the features. He says "it worked". And in the end you can see he actually knew that features not paid for will likely be removed.

The dealership, United Traders, reached out to me to add some details and more information about the sale of the Tesla and what they knew of its features at the time of the sale:

I saw the Tesla story blowing up on your website and a few others as well. We are the dealership (United Traders) that sold the Tesla to Alec B_____.

I bought that vehicle personally, and used the full self drive on it multiple times. It was working fine. One day, a random message popped up saying your autopilot has been upgraded after a software update. Then it disappeared. I figured it was a glitch. I already had an agreement with Alec to purchase the vehicle.

He did come and test drive it a few days later, and we both agreed it was a technical difficulty or bug that would be fixed by next software update. Since then Tesla has been of no assistance to him, and I have been doing my best to get him some help in this case.

I sell dozens of Teslas a year, and sold my father in law a Model X P90D with ludicrous speed package. 60 days after the purchase of the car, Tesla removed his ludicrous speed package. Upon complaints to them they said he never paid for it. We have video evidence and multiple pictures of the vehicle with it. They even removed the line under the P90D. I am still shocked at these acts.

[TerminalJack505]

It sounds like both Tesla and the dealer are playing dumb to some degree.  Tesla claims the vehicle was "incorrectly configured" and, therefore, disabled the features.  So the features were enabled when they--Tesla--sold the vehicle but then later claim the vehicle was "incorrectly configured" and disabled the features.

I have to wonder how that is going to go over in court.

Unless the dealer is being disingenuous then I don't see how Tesla has a case.  Maybe the dealer bought the car knowing it didn't come with the features but, if that's the case, I don't see how they would think they could get away with selling it as if it came with them.  They would have to have known they wouldn't get away with it.

[grumpydoc]

Rights and wrongs of this particular case aside, what it clearly demonstrates is that Tesla have no qualms in removing features from a car post market.

That's probably not  a manufacturer I want to buy from.

Admittedly the only real distinction between Tesla and other manufacturers is that they are a bit further along the curve than most.

Anyway, give it 25 years or so and no-one will own a car; there will be a fleet of self-driving cars and you you summon one for the individual journey that you wish to make. Way more efficient than everyone owning a car (or more than one) and it being parked, unused, 95% of the time.

[donotdespisethesnake]

I wouldn't trust a car dealer as far as I could throw him. It's safe to assume every sentence contains some form of lie. The statement from the dealer confirms that. He is saying "the feature was working when I drove it therefore it is legit". He deals with Tesla, and also has seen Tesla withdraw features not paid for, so he already knows he is lying.

Tesla provide the grey area, dodgy salesmen will exploit it. There is a remote possibility that the dealer didn't know what he was buying at auction, but salesmen don't get far without knowing the real $ value of items they are selling, so I find that unlikely.

[nctnico]

Anyway, give it 25 years or so and no-one will own a car; there will be a fleet of self-driving cars and you you summon one for the individual journey that you wish to make. Way more efficient than everyone owning a car (or more than one) and it being parked, unused, 95% of the time.

Offtopic: I doubt that will happen. Owning a (second hand) car which doesn't depreciate like crazy will always be cheaper to own even if it sits idle 95% of the time instead of renting. Also people will want to drive around in relatively new cars if they pay top dollar. Where do the older cars go to? Put some numbers on the idea and you'll see it will be a very expensive solution because at some point you'll need many cars at the same time.

[wraper]

I wouldn't trust a car dealer as far as I could throw him. It's safe to assume every sentence contains some form of lie. The statement from the dealer confirms that. He is saying "the feature was working when I drove it therefore it is legit". He deals with Tesla, and also has seen Tesla withdraw features not paid for, so he already knows he is lying.

Tesla provide the grey area, dodgy salesmen will exploit it. There is a remote possibility that the dealer didn't know what he was buying at auction, but salesmen don't get far without knowing the real $ value of items they are selling, so I find that unlikely.

Moreover as he already have seen features disabled, selling car with a premise AP will be fixed in software is basically fraud.

[SiliconWizard]

Tesla is probably doing the customer a favor here by disabling this crap anyway.

[GeorgeOfTheJungle]

Tesla is probably doing the customer a favor here by disabling this crap anyway.

Exactly!

[Brent88]

Anyway, give it 25 years or so and no-one will own a car; there will be a fleet of self-driving cars and you you summon one for the individual journey that you wish to make. Way more efficient than everyone owning a car (or more than one) and it being parked, unused, 95% of the time.

i rather not have to pay a 3rd party it's still WAY efficient  time wise to have your own and ownership cost less...
every 10,000 miles in a uber would cost about $30,000
  it cost me  about $2800 including,maintenance,fuel,insurance and reg..

 owning a car is still cheaper