Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
It's been going for a long, long time. To mention just a few: Too many people die due to not wearing seatbelt = seatbelt laws. Ford Explorers roll over because of low tire pressure = mandated TPMS sensors in ALL car tires. Insurance companies paying out because so many cars are stollen = $$$ key with ID transducer chip. Record number of car companies being sued for record amounts for failure to recall cars with (known to them) defects = ability to reprogram car, including deactivating it if it might be unsafe. I'm all for Right to Repair! My dealership sucks big time. I want the right to chose who repairs my car AND I'm willing to suffer whatever consequences for not taking it to the dealership. I do as much of my own service as I can, I take whatever repairs I want to an independent mechanic of MY choice and I check over all the dealership only service because they screw things up more often than not. Big deal Tesla can deactivate the cars it built! The Tesla is just a computer designed to look and work like a car. If it's your car then reverse engineer the software hardware and make it your own! Heck, you could even go in and disable Tesla's ability to disable it. Or talk to it. No, it's not easy, pretty near impossible, but not impossible and some of it so simple as to be overlooked. It's just a game of cat and mouse. -- View this message in context: http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EValert-Don-t-buy-a-salvaged-Tesla-EV-to-repair-drive-video-tp4671831p4671963.html Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
via EV wrote: I gave myself an idea. Fill the battery boxes with a fluid. If the fluid is leaking after a wreck, the battery boxes have been compromised, so the car shouldn't be driven. That's not a bad idea. Batteries also need heating and cooling. Fluids are a good way to add or remove heat. So the fluid could be circulated with a pump, and heated/cooled as needed. That would avoid the loss in range in cold weather, and shortened life in hot climates. -- Failure is only the opportunity to begin again more intelligently. -- Henry Ford -- Lee Hart's EV projects are at http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Klaus via EV wrote: It's been going for a long, long time. To mention just a few: [snip]... It's just a game of cat and mouse. A great summary, Klaus. And the cat has all the teeth and claws (money, lawyers and lobbyists). You'll notice that car companies have gotten a lot smarter in dealing with safety concerns. They just used to deny they existed, and fight every change. Now, they find a fix where they can add cost and increase their profit margin. Problem: Cars are easy to steal. Cheap, worthless locks. Old way: Not our fault! We use the best locks $1 can buy! Blame the crooks. Blame the customer. New way: Aha; let's use $2 locks, and make them so nobody but us can make keys. And we'll sell them for $100 each. We'll run the independent keymakers out of business, monopolize the key market, and make big money! Bwuoo hah hah ha! So the automakers write the laws the way they like, and lobby and make campaign contributions to get Congress to implement them. I'm all for Right to Repair! My dealership sucks big time. Same here. When the dealerships have a monopoly on parts and repairs, they inevitably turn into STEALerships. They can do bad work at high prices, and you don't have any choice. Big deal Tesla can deactivate the cars it built! The Tesla is just a computer designed to look and work like a car. It's been said that Microsoft has the perfect racket. A monopoly on PC operating systems, so they can charge a fortune for buggy software with a fake warranty. You only *think* you own the program; in fact, they can upgrade it any time they like to kill it, and force you to buy a new version. I'm sure there are people in the auto industry that look hungrily at this business model, and want to apply it to cars. If it's your car then reverse engineer the software hardware and make it your own! You're calling for an automotive version of Linux. It could happen! :-) At some point, consumers will have to stand up and say, Enough is enough! Learn to fix your own car (at least for the simpler things). Lobby for laws to protect YOUR rights. Hopefully, even contribute to open source efforts to unlock some of the automaker's little profit engines. -- Failure is only the opportunity to begin again more intelligently. -- Henry Ford -- Lee Hart's EV projects are at http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Hi Lee and All, Of course there is a solution, a complete electronics transplant. It's not like we haven't been doing that for decades now. Though what do you replace Tesla's with? ACPropulsion has a nice electronics suite with 150kw charger? Maybe Siemens? Maybe some no longer running EV bus electronics. Azure Dynamics? Jerry Dycus On Sunday, October 5, 2014 1:12 PM, Lee Hart via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Klaus via EV wrote: It's been going for a long, long time. To mention just a few: [snip]... It's just a game of cat and mouse. A great summary, Klaus. And the cat has all the teeth and claws (money, lawyers and lobbyists). You'll notice that car companies have gotten a lot smarter in dealing with safety concerns. They just used to deny they existed, and fight every change. Now, they find a fix where they can add cost and increase their profit margin. Problem: Cars are easy to steal. Cheap, worthless locks. Old way: Not our fault! We use the best locks $1 can buy! Blame the crooks. Blame the customer. New way: Aha; let's use $2 locks, and make them so nobody but us can make keys. And we'll sell them for $100 each. We'll run the independent keymakers out of business, monopolize the key market, and make big money! Bwuoo hah hah ha! So the automakers write the laws the way they like, and lobby and make campaign contributions to get Congress to implement them. I'm all for Right to Repair! My dealership sucks big time. Same here. When the dealerships have a monopoly on parts and repairs, they inevitably turn into STEALerships. They can do bad work at high prices, and you don't have any choice. Big deal Tesla can deactivate the cars it built! The Tesla is just a computer designed to look and work like a car. It's been said that Microsoft has the perfect racket. A monopoly on PC operating systems, so they can charge a fortune for buggy software with a fake warranty. You only *think* you own the program; in fact, they can upgrade it any time they like to kill it, and force you to buy a new version. I'm sure there are people in the auto industry that look hungrily at this business model, and want to apply it to cars. If it's your car then reverse engineer the software hardware and make it your own! You're calling for an automotive version of Linux. It could happen! :-) At some point, consumers will have to stand up and say, Enough is enough! Learn to fix your own car (at least for the simpler things). Lobby for laws to protect YOUR rights. Hopefully, even contribute to open source efforts to unlock some of the automaker's little profit engines. -- Failure is only the opportunity to begin again more intelligently. -- Henry Ford -- Lee Hart's EV projects are at http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141005/a6bf0656/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Back when cpu cycles were expensive, automakers mostly used the minimum amount of processor power necessary to control emissions and air bags. As memory and cpus got to where they cost pennies, they realized that they could control a lot more with them. They could make the dome light fade in and out. They could keep people from buying cheaper used parts. They could prove that when the wreck happened, the driver had his foot on the accelerator, not the brake. They could shut down the vehicle if the owner didn't do what the purchase or lease agreement stipulated. As we're seeing in almost every other area where computers are involved - which is just about everywhere - Moore's law has turned out to be the proverbial double-edged sword. But that's another discussion for another list, I suppose. For the purposes of this list, let's just say that maybe some EV converters have other reasons to wear an EV grin besides it's clean and quiet, and it passes all the gas stations. David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Sadly, due to my exposure to OEM representatives (auto makers), I can safely say that they will cut every penny out where they can. For example, I was talking to one standards representative (I won't say the company name, as it is pretty much the same everywhere), and they could not support TLS on their computers and would not upgrade the computer until there was a strong need. The computer would be dealing with billing for the power used to charge the vehicle!!! Sheesh. On 10/5/14, 8:54 PM, EVDL Administrator via EV wrote: Back when cpu cycles were expensive, automakers mostly used the minimum amount of processor power necessary to control emissions and air bags. As memory and cpus got to where they cost pennies, they realized that they could control a lot more with them. They could make the dome light fade in and out. They could keep people from buying cheaper used parts. They could prove that when the wreck happened, the driver had his foot on the accelerator, not the brake. They could shut down the vehicle if the owner didn't do what the purchase or lease agreement stipulated. As we're seeing in almost every other area where computers are involved - which is just about everywhere - Moore's law has turned out to be the proverbial double-edged sword. But that's another discussion for another list, I suppose. For the purposes of this list, let's just say that maybe some EV converters have other reasons to wear an EV grin besides it's clean and quiet, and it passes all the gas stations. David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On Oct 5, 2014, at 9:21 PM, Peter C. Thompson via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: [T]hey could not support TLS on their computers and would not upgrade the computer until there was a strong need. The computer would be dealing with billing for the power used to charge the vehicle!!! Then it won't be long before people start charging their cars for free. Those kinds of hacks, especially when encryption is lacking, are trivial for those in the industry -- and I mean electronics, not automotive. It's pretty much a given that somebody in Silicon Valley soon will or already has read your words here (or a similar report from somebody else) and is already reaching for the logic analyzer to start sniffing the wires in the car sitting in his garage b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141005/9677a451/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
It's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. The big standard for gasoline wrecks is is it leaking any fluids? If it is leaking any fluids, the vehicle gets towed away and no attempt is made to start it. An EV does not have so obvious an indicator. A wreck could expose some high voltage wiring, hold shut the overpressure caps, dent some cells, sever a few parallel connections, etc. For all of these the EV might run just fine, might even look fine, but not be safe. Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 at 12:52 PM From: Roger Stockton via EV ev@lists.evdl.org To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video) ... The energy content of gasoline is 32.4MJ/L, and 1MJ=0.28kWh; so, a 10 (US) gallon tank of ordinary gasoline contains 343kWh of energy, and yet every other auto manufacturer has *millions* of vehicles on the road with a manually-resettable-by-anyone inertia switch to disable this energy source in the event of a sufficiently serious accident. Yes, a means of automatically disabling/disconnecting the traction pack in the event of an accident makes sense for ~any~ EV, however, there is no obvious justification for this feature not being manually resettable without the assistance of the manufacturer. It seems reasonable that the vehicle might have the intelligence to refuse to re-enable should its onboard diagnostics determine that something is unsafe or defective with its systems (in the same way that a manually-resettable circuit breaker will immediately re-open if the a fault condition persists), but again it is not obvious that there is any need for the involvement of the manufacturer. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
I gave myself an idea. Fill the battery boxes with a fluid. If the fluid is leaking after a wreck, the battery boxes have been compromised, so the car shouldn't be driven. Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2014 at 1:05 AM From: via EV ev@lists.evdl.org To: ev@lists.evdl.org Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video) It's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. The big standard for gasoline wrecks is is it leaking any fluids? If it is leaking any fluids, the vehicle gets towed away and no attempt is made to start it. An EV does not have so obvious an indicator. A wreck could expose some high voltage wiring, hold shut the overpressure caps, dent some cells, sever a few parallel connections, etc. For all of these the EV might run just fine, might even look fine, but not be safe. Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 at 12:52 PM From: Roger Stockton via EV ev@lists.evdl.org To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video) ... The energy content of gasoline is 32.4MJ/L, and 1MJ=0.28kWh; so, a 10 (US) gallon tank of ordinary gasoline contains 343kWh of energy, and yet every other auto manufacturer has *millions* of vehicles on the road with a manually-resettable-by-anyone inertia switch to disable this energy source in the event of a sufficiently serious accident. Yes, a means of automatically disabling/disconnecting the traction pack in the event of an accident makes sense for ~any~ EV, however, there is no obvious justification for this feature not being manually resettable without the assistance of the manufacturer. It seems reasonable that the vehicle might have the intelligence to refuse to re-enable should its onboard diagnostics determine that something is unsafe or defective with its systems (in the same way that a manually-resettable circuit breaker will immediately re-open if the a fault condition persists), but again it is not obvious that there is any need for the involvement of the manufacturer. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA][http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA]]) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Careful, the mothership is watching you from space! Sent from my iPhone On Oct 1, 2014, at 1:55 PM, EVDL Administrator via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On 1 Oct 2014 at 11:01, Rick Beebe via EV wrote: If they're happy with the inspection they'll reactive the car. Control freaks. Maybe other folks are fine with this. More power to you, no pun intended. But blast it, I already have enough things in my life that spy on me and/or restrict my rights, even though I've paid for them and SHOULD own and control them. I don't need one more. Bummer, because Tesla makes a nice EV. Not that I could afford one anyway, but still. BTW, a lot of EV folks cheered Tesla on in their spat with that reporter who tried to trash-talk the car. But the whole We know what you did, you drove in circles in a parking lot to kill the battery deal was just plain creepy. David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I absolutely disagree. If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's problem. You could disassemble it, turn it into a fish tank, build it into a transformer, whatever. Saying that the car is complex does not change the question of ownership. When you sell something you give up interest in the object you sold. It is gone; it is no longer yours. Now, it is perfectly acceptable to offer warranties and other incentives. These things do not dilute the ownership question but rather provide some route for extra support after the sale. In all the cases we're currently hearing about the people with the cars are NOT trying to assert any warranty claims at all. They just want to fix their own car. Let's say that some safety systems are not working. If that is the case the car should know about it. This is not 1950. Cars have complicated diagnostic systems as well as complicated safety systems. Some cars even tell you which light is burnt out so you don't have to guess when it happens. If Tesla did even a half assed job of making their cars then it'll know if any of the sensors or systems seem to be malfunctioning. At that point it can warn the owner of the vehicle that something still isn't right. Often you are allowed to drive anyway so long as the problem isn't too dire. There is no need for Tesla to inspect the vehicle's sensors and computer systems. They do that themselves. The more pertinent problem here is likely the frame of the car. If it is cracked in half nothing else in the car is likely to know about it until the car tears in two. So, I could see someone being nervous about that. That's why the DMV will want the car's structure and suspension to be inspected before it is licensed for on-the-road use. Tesla has nothing to do with that. No, all of this is just Tesla being overbearing control freaks. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service. Lawrence Harris This is also stupid and many people want a law (right to repair) to fix this sort of issue. I'm sure that their stated reason for doing VIN locking is to prevent chop shops from parting out people's vehicles. That's still a stupid reason and really a lie. I seriously doubt that the OEM cares about chop shops. They care about control. Now we're seeing that Tesla is showing their true colors as well. I suppose it isn't really a surprise but many people had hoped that Elon Musk would be different. It turns out that Tesla is behaving pretty much like all the big auto makers. I guess they want to fit in? There is currently a war against ownership and I'm not terribly fond of it. Unfortunately, few people seem to care. They're content to almost kind of sort of own things that they bought and paid for. And, that's sad. The general complacently of the populous leads to all sorts of dark places. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/4d9e80f8/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
This is laughable. Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with. But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage CAR which you OWN. If you want help from Tesla, either do what they want (to give you the help while minimizing their risk) or shut-up and go sit in your car and enjoy your OWNERSHIP as a yard ornament. Bob On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I absolutely disagree. If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's problem. You could disassemble it, turn it into a fish tank, build it into a transformer, whatever. Saying that the car is complex does not change the question of ownership. When you sell something you give up interest in the object you sold. It is gone; it is no longer yours. Now, it is perfectly acceptable to offer warranties and other incentives. These things do not dilute the ownership question but rather provide some route for extra support after the sale. In all the cases we're currently hearing about the people with the cars are NOT trying to assert any warranty claims at all. They just want to fix their own car. Let's say that some safety systems are not working. If that is the case the car should know about it. This is not 1950. Cars have complicated diagnostic systems as well as complicated safety systems. Some cars even tell you which light is burnt out so you don't have to guess when it happens. If Tesla did even a half assed job of making their cars then it'll know if any of the sensors or systems seem to be malfunctioning. At that point it can warn the owner of the vehicle that something still isn't right. Often you are allowed to drive anyway so long as the problem isn't too dire. There is no need for Tesla to inspect the vehicle's sensors and computer systems. They do that themselves. The more pertinent problem here is likely the frame of the car. If it is cracked in half nothing else in the car is likely to know about it until the car tears in two. So, I could see someone being nervous about that. That's why the DMV will want the car's structure and suspension to be inspected before it is licensed for on-the-road use. Tesla has nothing to do with that. No, all of this is just Tesla being overbearing control freaks. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service. Lawrence Harris This is also stupid and many people want a law (right to repair) to fix this sort of issue. I'm sure that their stated reason for doing VIN locking is to prevent chop shops from parting out people's vehicles. That's still a stupid reason and really a lie. I seriously doubt that the OEM cares about chop shops. They care about control. Now we're seeing that Tesla is showing their true colors as well. I suppose it isn't really a surprise but many people had hoped that Elon Musk would be different. It turns out that Tesla is behaving pretty much like all the big auto makers. I guess they want to fit in? There is currently a war against ownership and I'm not terribly fond of it. Unfortunately, few people seem to care. They're content to almost kind of sort of own things that they bought and paid for. And, that's sad. The general complacently of the populous leads to all sorts of dark places. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/4d9e80f8/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
I can understand why Tesla are a bit twitchy about people re-building accident damaged cars as the main cell pack under the floor could be damaged. Imagine the headlines if the car caught fire with young kids in it. Any car which has suffered an accident will have some deceleration damage to areas which are not easily picked up. Any number of the multiple thousands of cells in that battery pack could have suffered damage. It happened in the early stages of the Volt testing when weeks after an impact test, the car burst into flames. http://consumerist.com/2012/01/23/nhtsa-says-dont-worry-about-your-chevy-volt-erupting-into-flames-more-than-other-cars/ Hardly surprising why Tesla are keeping their distance. Russ On Thu, 2/10/14, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video) To: Lawrence Harris lhar...@haritech.com, Electric Vehicle Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org Date: Thursday, 2 October, 2014, 14:18 On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I absolutely disagree. If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's problem. You could disassemble it, turn it into a fish tank, build it into a transformer, whatever. Saying that the car is complex does not change the question of ownership. When you sell something you give up interest in the object you sold. It is gone; it is no longer yours. Now, it is perfectly acceptable to offer warranties and other incentives. These things do not dilute the ownership question but rather provide some route for extra support after the sale. In all the cases we're currently hearing about the people with the cars are NOT trying to assert any warranty claims at all. They just want to fix their own car. Let's say that some safety systems are not working. If that is the case the car should know about it. This is not 1950. Cars have complicated diagnostic systems as well as complicated safety systems. Some cars even tell you which light is burnt out so you don't have to guess when it happens. If Tesla did even a half assed job of making their cars then it'll know if any of the sensors or systems seem to be malfunctioning. At that point it can warn the owner of the vehicle that something still isn't right. Often you are allowed to drive anyway so long as the problem isn't too dire. There is no need for Tesla to inspect the vehicle's sensors and computer systems. They do that themselves. The more pertinent problem here is likely the frame of the car. If it is cracked in half nothing else in the car is likely to know about it until the car tears in two. So, I could see someone being nervous about that. That's why the DMV will want the car's structure and suspension to be inspected before it is licensed for on-the-road use. Tesla has nothing to do with that. No, all of this is just Tesla being overbearing control freaks. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service. Lawrence Harris This is also stupid and many people want a law (right to repair) to fix this sort of issue. I'm sure that their stated reason for doing VIN locking is to prevent chop shops from parting out people's vehicles. That's still a stupid reason and really a lie. I seriously doubt that the OEM cares about chop shops. They care about control. Now we're seeing that Tesla is showing their true colors as well. I suppose it isn't really a surprise but many people had hoped that Elon Musk would be different. It turns out that Tesla is behaving pretty much like all the big auto makers. I guess they want to fit in? There is currently a war against ownership and I'm not terribly fond of it. Unfortunately, few people seem to care. They're content
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it off in the first place. My argument is thus (and obviously) that they had no business disabling the car in the first place. It was not their car. I fail to understand how people can justify someone else disabling a car that they own. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu wrote: This is laughable. Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with. But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage CAR which you OWN. If you want help from Tesla, either do what they want (to give you the help while minimizing their risk) or shut-up and go sit in your car and enjoy your OWNERSHIP as a yard ornament. Bob On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I absolutely disagree. If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's problem. You could disassemble it, turn it into a fish tank, build it into a transformer, whatever. Saying that the car is complex does not change the question of ownership. When you sell something you give up interest in the object you sold. It is gone; it is no longer yours. Now, it is perfectly acceptable to offer warranties and other incentives. These things do not dilute the ownership question but rather provide some route for extra support after the sale. In all the cases we're currently hearing about the people with the cars are NOT trying to assert any warranty claims at all. They just want to fix their own car. Let's say that some safety systems are not working. If that is the case the car should know about it. This is not 1950. Cars have complicated diagnostic systems as well as complicated safety systems. Some cars even tell you which light is burnt out so you don't have to guess when it happens. If Tesla did even a half assed job of making their cars then it'll know if any of the sensors or systems seem to be malfunctioning. At that point it can warn the owner of the vehicle that something still isn't right. Often you are allowed to drive anyway so long as the problem isn't too dire. There is no need for Tesla to inspect the vehicle's sensors and computer systems. They do that themselves. The more pertinent problem here is likely the frame of the car. If it is cracked in half nothing else in the car is likely to know about it until the car tears in two. So, I could see someone being nervous about that. That's why the DMV will want the car's structure and suspension to be inspected before it is licensed for on-the-road use. Tesla has nothing to do with that. No, all of this is just Tesla being overbearing control freaks. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service. Lawrence Harris This is also stupid and many people want a law (right to repair) to fix this sort of issue. I'm sure that their stated reason for doing VIN locking is to prevent chop shops from parting out people's vehicles. That's still a stupid reason and really a lie. I seriously doubt that the OEM cares about chop shops. They care about control. Now we're seeing that Tesla is showing their true colors as well. I suppose it isn't really a surprise but many people had hoped that Elon Musk would be different. It turns out that Tesla is behaving pretty much like all the big auto makers. I guess they want to fit in? There is currently a war against ownership and I'm not terribly fond of it. Unfortunately, few people seem to care. They're content to almost kind of sort of own things that they bought and paid for. And, that's
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
I was siding with Tesla until reading this response. That really resonates with me but there's a catch. Does anyone know what agreement you sign when you buy a Tesla? In particular, does it give Tesla the right to disable the car after an accident at their discretion? If not, I think Tesla may be have been in the wrong in this case. Peri -- Original Message -- From: Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org To: Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu Cc: Electric Vehicle Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org Sent: 02-Oct-14 6:42:01 AM Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video) Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it off in the first place. My argument is thus (and obviously) that they had no business disabling the car in the first place. It was not their car. I fail to understand how people can justify someone else disabling a car that they own. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu wrote: This is laughable. Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with. But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage CAR which you OWN. If you want help from Tesla, either do what they want (to give you the help while minimizing their risk) or shut-up and go sit in your car and enjoy your OWNERSHIP as a yard ornament. Bob On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I absolutely disagree. If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's problem. You could disassemble it, turn it into a fish tank, build it into a transformer, whatever. Saying that the car is complex does not change the question of ownership. When you sell something you give up interest in the object you sold. It is gone; it is no longer yours. Now, it is perfectly acceptable to offer warranties and other incentives. These things do not dilute the ownership question but rather provide some route for extra support after the sale. In all the cases we're currently hearing about the people with the cars are NOT trying to assert any warranty claims at all. They just want to fix their own car. Let's say that some safety systems are not working. If that is the case the car should know about it. This is not 1950. Cars have complicated diagnostic systems as well as complicated safety systems. Some cars even tell you which light is burnt out so you don't have to guess when it happens. If Tesla did even a half assed job of making their cars then it'll know if any of the sensors or systems seem to be malfunctioning. At that point it can warn the owner of the vehicle that something still isn't right. Often you are allowed to drive anyway so long as the problem isn't too dire. There is no need for Tesla to inspect the vehicle's sensors and computer systems. They do that themselves. The more pertinent problem here is likely the frame of the car. If it is cracked in half nothing else in the car is likely to know about it until the car tears in two. So, I could see someone being nervous about that. That's why the DMV will want the car's structure and suspension to be inspected before it is licensed for on-the-road use. Tesla has nothing to do with that. No, all of this is just Tesla being overbearing control freaks. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service. Lawrence Harris This is also stupid and many people want a law (right to repair) to fix this sort of issue. I'm sure that their stated reason for doing
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled. It may have disabled itself for safety reasons. It was a pile of junk you bought it. You have think you have rebuilt a car from that junk and now you want the systems activated without showing that the system is in any state where that can safely be done. Ps by 'you' I mean the generic you. Lawrence On Oct 2, 2014, at 6:42, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it off in the first place. My argument is thus (and obviously) that they had no business disabling the car in the first place. It was not their car. I fail to understand how people can justify someone else disabling a car that they own. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu wrote: This is laughable. Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with. But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage CAR which you OWN. If you want help from Tesla, either do what they want (to give you the help while minimizing their risk) or shut-up and go sit in your car and enjoy your OWNERSHIP as a yard ornament. Bob On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I absolutely disagree. If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's problem. You could disassemble it, turn it into a fish tank, build it into a transformer, whatever. Saying that the car is complex does not change the question of ownership. When you sell something you give up interest in the object you sold. It is gone; it is no longer yours. Now, it is perfectly acceptable to offer warranties and other incentives. These things do not dilute the ownership question but rather provide some route for extra support after the sale. In all the cases we're currently hearing about the people with the cars are NOT trying to assert any warranty claims at all. They just want to fix their own car. Let's say that some safety systems are not working. If that is the case the car should know about it. This is not 1950. Cars have complicated diagnostic systems as well as complicated safety systems. Some cars even tell you which light is burnt out so you don't have to guess when it happens. If Tesla did even a half assed job of making their cars then it'll know if any of the sensors or systems seem to be malfunctioning. At that point it can warn the owner of the vehicle that something still isn't right. Often you are allowed to drive anyway so long as the problem isn't too dire. There is no need for Tesla to inspect the vehicle's sensors and computer systems. They do that themselves. The more pertinent problem here is likely the frame of the car. If it is cracked in half nothing else in the car is likely to know about it until the car tears in two. So, I could see someone being nervous about that. That's why the DMV will want the car's structure and suspension to be inspected before it is licensed for on-the-road use. Tesla has nothing to do with that. No, all of this is just Tesla being overbearing control freaks. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service. Lawrence Harris This is also stupid and many people want a law (right to repair) to fix this sort of issue. I'm sure that their stated reason for doing VIN locking is to prevent chop shops from parting out people's vehicles. That's still a stupid reason and really a lie. I seriously doubt that the OEM cares about chop shops. They care about control. Now we're seeing that Tesla is showing their true colors as
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On Oct 2, 2014, at 6:42 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it off in the first place. Exactly. Nice car you've got there that we've just sold you. Be a shame if you wanted to do anything to it we don't approve of and we had to press a button and remotely turn it into scrap. Be even more of a shame if you had to meet our demands to get us to un-press the button. And, of course, it's not just Tesla, though their cars, whether intentionally or incidentally, seem to be built with more potential for this type of ransom than other manufacturers. That's why I have no interest in pretending to own a car with a computer I can't completely control myself, and why I'm leery of cars that rely on computers in general. Not because they've got computers in them, but because the history of the implementation of these computers has been, from the very beginning, to lock out unauthorized access -- with the putative owners themselves generally being considered the most unauthorized ones of all. b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/cba05728/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled. Then the sale was fraudulent, whether intentionally so or otherwise. The buyer thought he was buying a salvageable car, not a pile of scrap metal. But, considering that it's Tesla, not the seller, who's responsible for turning what was, in fact, a salvageable car into a pile of scrap...most of us would consider that either theft or destruction of property. Morally, whether or not legally. Imagine the car has, instead of a regular glovebox, a safe...and that the entire wiring harness goes through this safe, and all the fuses are inside the safe. For safety reasons, the safe is designed to lock itself when an accelerometer detects a crash...but, though the manufacturer gave you the key to the front of the safe when you bought the car, they neglected to give you the key to the back of the safe that unlocks it after a crash. They still have that key, but they won't give it to you, even though you ostensibly own the car. Ethical companies do not pull these sorts of shenanigans. Tesla is well within its rights to publicly disclaim responsibility for what this guy does with the car he's bought in known-damaged condition from a third party. They don't have -- or, at least, _shouldn't_ have -- the right to hinder him doing what he wants with the car, and that includes maintaining control of parts of the car that they have no right keeping out of the control of all their other owners. ...because, really: that's what this is all about. It's now apparent that Tesla can turn iany/i of their cars into scrap metal just by pressing a button, and if you don't like the fact that that's what they've done, your only recourse is to sue one of the richest men on the planet. Good luck with that, as they say. b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/e087bcef/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
I agree. The seller didn't understand what he was buying. That's really the end of the story. He didn't buy it from Tesla so it's not Teslas jobs to ensure the scrap was re manufacturable into a car. It is Teslas role/right to ensure their name and brand is protected. Lawrence On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:42, Ben Goren b...@trumpetpower.com wrote: On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled. Then the sale was fraudulent, whether intentionally so or otherwise. The buyer thought he was buying a salvageable car, not a pile of scrap metal. But, considering that it's Tesla, not the seller, who's responsible for turning what was, in fact, a salvageable car into a pile of scrap...most of us would consider that either theft or destruction of property. Morally, whether or not legally. Imagine the car has, instead of a regular glovebox, a safe...and that the entire wiring harness goes through this safe, and all the fuses are inside the safe. For safety reasons, the safe is designed to lock itself when an accelerometer detects a crash...but, though the manufacturer gave you the key to the front of the safe when you bought the car, they neglected to give you the key to the back of the safe that unlocks it after a crash. They still have that key, but they won't give it to you, even though you ostensibly own the car. Ethical companies do not pull these sorts of shenanigans. Tesla is well within its rights to publicly disclaim responsibility for what this guy does with the car he's bought in known-damaged condition from a third party. They don't have -- or, at least, _shouldn't_ have -- the right to hinder him doing what he wants with the car, and that includes maintaining control of parts of the car that they have no right keeping out of the control of all their other owners. ...because, really: that's what this is all about. It's now apparent that Tesla can turn iany/i of their cars into scrap metal just by pressing a button, and if you don't like the fact that that's what they've done, your only recourse is to sue one of the richest men on the planet. Good luck with that, as they say. b ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
I think that, by this point, we all agree on that point: the buyer did not receive what he thought he had received. I believe that the company that sold the salvage car likely did not realize the true situation either. I would think that the sell would fall into questionable legality given the circumstances. The lingering question, and point of disagreement, is whether Tesla has any legal or moral authority or sanction to disable a vehicle that they no longer own. My view is that it is never acceptable for the originating company to disable a device without the sanction of the current owner. I seriously doubt that the owner at the time of the crash really wanted them to totally disable the car remotely. Disabling the car is the responsibility of the inertia sensors in the car. THAT is for safety.These things can be reset by the owner. Instead Tesla has electronically disabled the car in such a way that only they can unlock it. This is unconscionable as far as I'm concerned. This is not for safety. This is all so that Tesla can retain total control of something they have already sold. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I agree. The seller didn't understand what he was buying. That's really the end of the story. He didn't buy it from Tesla so it's not Teslas jobs to ensure the scrap was re manufacturable into a car. It is Teslas role/right to ensure their name and brand is protected. Lawrence On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:42, Ben Goren b...@trumpetpower.com wrote: On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled. Then the sale was fraudulent, whether intentionally so or otherwise. The buyer thought he was buying a salvageable car, not a pile of scrap metal. But, considering that it's Tesla, not the seller, who's responsible for turning what was, in fact, a salvageable car into a pile of scrap...most of us would consider that either theft or destruction of property. Morally, whether or not legally. Imagine the car has, instead of a regular glovebox, a safe...and that the entire wiring harness goes through this safe, and all the fuses are inside the safe. For safety reasons, the safe is designed to lock itself when an accelerometer detects a crash...but, though the manufacturer gave you the key to the front of the safe when you bought the car, they neglected to give you the key to the back of the safe that unlocks it after a crash. They still have that key, but they won't give it to you, even though you ostensibly own the car. Ethical companies do not pull these sorts of shenanigans. Tesla is well within its rights to publicly disclaim responsibility for what this guy does with the car he's bought in known-damaged condition from a third party. They don't have -- or, at least, _shouldn't_ have -- the right to hinder him doing what he wants with the car, and that includes maintaining control of parts of the car that they have no right keeping out of the control of all their other owners. ...because, really: that's what this is all about. It's now apparent that Tesla can turn iany/i of their cars into scrap metal just by pressing a button, and if you don't like the fact that that's what they've done, your only recourse is to sue one of the richest men on the planet. Good luck with that, as they say. b ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/a5324e00/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Yes, but again, it depends on what the buyer signed. For example, with software, the licensing agreements usually state that you do not own the software but only have the right to use it which can be terminated under certain conditions. Tesla could have included similar language. Ethical or not, I believe they do have the right to include such language. Peri -- Original Message -- From: Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org To: Haritech (Gmail) lhar...@haritech.com; Electric Vehicle Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org Sent: 02-Oct-14 8:04:14 AM Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video) I think that, by this point, we all agree on that point: the buyer did not receive what he thought he had received. I believe that the company that sold the salvage car likely did not realize the true situation either. I would think that the sell would fall into questionable legality given the circumstances. The lingering question, and point of disagreement, is whether Tesla has any legal or moral authority or sanction to disable a vehicle that they no longer own. My view is that it is never acceptable for the originating company to disable a device without the sanction of the current owner. I seriously doubt that the owner at the time of the crash really wanted them to totally disable the car remotely. Disabling the car is the responsibility of the inertia sensors in the car. THAT is for safety.These things can be reset by the owner. Instead Tesla has electronically disabled the car in such a way that only they can unlock it. This is unconscionable as far as I'm concerned. This is not for safety. This is all so that Tesla can retain total control of something they have already sold. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I agree. The seller didn't understand what he was buying. That's really the end of the story. He didn't buy it from Tesla so it's not Teslas jobs to ensure the scrap was re manufacturable into a car. It is Teslas role/right to ensure their name and brand is protected. Lawrence On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:42, Ben Goren b...@trumpetpower.com wrote: On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled. Then the sale was fraudulent, whether intentionally so or otherwise. The buyer thought he was buying a salvageable car, not a pile of scrap metal. But, considering that it's Tesla, not the seller, who's responsible for turning what was, in fact, a salvageable car into a pile of scrap...most of us would consider that either theft or destruction of property. Morally, whether or not legally. Imagine the car has, instead of a regular glovebox, a safe...and that the entire wiring harness goes through this safe, and all the fuses are inside the safe. For safety reasons, the safe is designed to lock itself when an accelerometer detects a crash...but, though the manufacturer gave you the key to the front of the safe when you bought the car, they neglected to give you the key to the back of the safe that unlocks it after a crash. They still have that key, but they won't give it to you, even though you ostensibly own the car. Ethical companies do not pull these sorts of shenanigans. Tesla is well within its rights to publicly disclaim responsibility for what this guy does with the car he's bought in known-damaged condition from a third party. They don't have -- or, at least, _shouldn't_ have -- the right to hinder him doing what he wants with the car, and that includes maintaining control of parts of the car that they have no right keeping out of the control of all their other owners. ...because, really: that's what this is all about. It's now apparent that Tesla can turn iany/i of their cars into scrap metal just by pressing a button, and if you don't like the fact that that's what they've done, your only recourse is to sue one of the richest men on the planet. Good luck with that, as they say. b ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/a5324e00/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
This is a great discussion! I am OK with Tesla's approach, I own just enough stock to care that they don't go bankrupt from liability issues. I think the are just being prudent. That makes me happy. I also think that salvaged Teslas are far less valuable than the guy who bought one paid and started this conversation - specifically because Tesla must keep this tight reign on it. A DIY guy can probably take a wrecked Tesla and get a lot out of it, but you just can't get a fully functioning Tesla out of it. So don't pay a lot for one. I am sure you can make the motor run, but not with all the bells and whistles. If you buy one then know that you are buying a different sort of package - you won't get to customize it the ways you might like. The vast majority of Tesla customers are not going to care about this. If Tesla continues to behave well, then it will be a very nice experience for them. Infinite miles warranties and such don't grow on trees. It will be different. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Ben Goren via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On Oct 2, 2014, at 6:42 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it off in the first place. Exactly. Nice car you've got there that we've just sold you. Be a shame if you wanted to do anything to it we don't approve of and we had to press a button and remotely turn it into scrap. Be even more of a shame if you had to meet our demands to get us to un-press the button. And, of course, it's not just Tesla, though their cars, whether intentionally or incidentally, seem to be built with more potential for this type of ransom than other manufacturers. That's why I have no interest in pretending to own a car with a computer I can't completely control myself, and why I'm leery of cars that rely on computers in general. Not because they've got computers in them, but because the history of the implementation of these computers has been, from the very beginning, to lock out unauthorized access -- with the putative owners themselves generally being considered the most unauthorized ones of all. b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/cba05728/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- Put this question to yourself: should I use everyone else to attain happiness, or should I help others gain happiness? *Dalai Lama * Tell me what it is you plan to do With your one wild and precious life? Mary Oliver, The summer day. To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk. Thomas A. Edison http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/thomasaed125362.html A public-opinion poll is no substitute for thought. *Warren Buffet* Michael E. Ross (919) 550-2430 Land (919) 576-0824 https://www.google.com/voice/b/0?pli=1#phones Google Phone (919) 631-1451 Cell (919) 513-0418 Desk michael.e.r...@gmail.com michael.e.r...@gmail.com -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/52dc457c/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
If a Tesla is to be sold as Salvageable, then prior to listing for sale it should be inspected by Tesla and results provided in the sale listing. Without the inspection and doc it should only be listable as unrepairable. On October 2, 2014 10:04:14 AM CDT, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I think that, by this point, we all agree on that point: the buyer did not receive what he thought he had received. I believe that the company that sold the salvage car likely did not realize the true situation either. I would think that the sell would fall into questionable legality given the circumstances. The lingering question, and point of disagreement, is whether Tesla has any legal or moral authority or sanction to disable a vehicle that they no longer own. My view is that it is never acceptable for the originating company to disable a device without the sanction of the current owner. I seriously doubt that the owner at the time of the crash really wanted them to totally disable the car remotely. Disabling the car is the responsibility of the inertia sensors in the car. THAT is for safety.These things can be reset by the owner. Instead Tesla has electronically disabled the car in such a way that only they can unlock it. This is unconscionable as far as I'm concerned. This is not for safety. This is all so that Tesla can retain total control of something they have already sold. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I agree. The seller didn't understand what he was buying. That's really the end of the story. He didn't buy it from Tesla so it's not Teslas jobs to ensure the scrap was re manufacturable into a car. It is Teslas role/right to ensure their name and brand is protected. Lawrence On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:42, Ben Goren b...@trumpetpower.com wrote: On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled. Then the sale was fraudulent, whether intentionally so or otherwise. The buyer thought he was buying a salvageable car, not a pile of scrap metal. But, considering that it's Tesla, not the seller, who's responsible for turning what was, in fact, a salvageable car into a pile of scrap...most of us would consider that either theft or destruction of property. Morally, whether or not legally. Imagine the car has, instead of a regular glovebox, a safe...and that the entire wiring harness goes through this safe, and all the fuses are inside the safe. For safety reasons, the safe is designed to lock itself when an accelerometer detects a crash...but, though the manufacturer gave you the key to the front of the safe when you bought the car, they neglected to give you the key to the back of the safe that unlocks it after a crash. They still have that key, but they won't give it to you, even though you ostensibly own the car. Ethical companies do not pull these sorts of shenanigans. Tesla is well within its rights to publicly disclaim responsibility for what this guy does with the car he's bought in known-damaged condition from a third party. They don't have -- or, at least, _shouldn't_ have -- the right to hinder him doing what he wants with the car, and that includes maintaining control of parts of the car that they have no right keeping out of the control of all their other owners. ...because, really: that's what this is all about. It's now apparent that Tesla can turn iany/i of their cars into scrap metal just by pressing a button, and if you don't like the fact that that's what they've done, your only recourse is to sue one of the richest men on the planet. Good luck with that, as they say. b ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/a5324e00/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/8055fcd6/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On Oct 2, 2014, at 8:09 AM, Peri Hartman via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Yes, but again, it depends on what the buyer signed. For example, with software, the licensing agreements usually state that you do not own the software but only have the right to use it which can be terminated under certain conditions. Tesla could have included similar language. Ethical or not, I believe they do have the right to include such language. Just as you do not have the right to sell yourself into slavery, you should also not have the right to buy something you don't actually own after the completion of the sale. Software licensing agreements are an horrific perversion of the legal system, especially the doctrine of first sale...and this push to make even tangible goods subject to similar agreements is going to bite us all very hard in the ass. Either you own something or you do not. If you own it, it's nobody else's business what you do with it. If somebody else can tell you what you can and can't do with it, you don't own it. So why did you give them all that money, again...? b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/2a6768fd/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
I agree with you, Ben, but you're speaking ethics. I, too, would like the software laws changed so you can fully own what you purchase (unless you are specifically purchasing a subscription to an online service, for example). Further, I agree that it's wrong to apply this conditional ownership language to tangible goods. If, in fact, Tesla has done this, we probably need to address congress to change the law to prevent this. Peri -- Original Message -- From: Ben Goren b...@trumpetpower.com To: Peri Hartman pe...@kotatko.com; Electric Vehicle Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org Sent: 02-Oct-14 8:35:46 AM Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video) On Oct 2, 2014, at 8:09 AM, Peri Hartman via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Yes, but again, it depends on what the buyer signed. For example, with software, the licensing agreements usually state that you do not own the software but only have the right to use it which can be terminated under certain conditions. Tesla could have included similar language. Ethical or not, I believe they do have the right to include such language. Just as you do not have the right to sell yourself into slavery, you should also not have the right to buy something you don't actually own after the completion of the sale. Software licensing agreements are an horrific perversion of the legal system, especially the doctrine of first sale...and this push to make even tangible goods subject to similar agreements is going to bite us all very hard in the ass. Either you own something or you do not. If you own it, it's nobody else's business what you do with it. If somebody else can tell you what you can and can't do with it, you don't own it. So why did you give them all that money, again...? b ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Collin Kidder via EV wrote: If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's problem. I agree with Collin. He bought it; it's his to do with as he likes. Tesla can choose to help (by supplying parts, offering inspections, or service). Or they can choose NOT to help (turn away business), though they are legally obligated to provide at least the same level of service as anyone else that walked in the door on a non-discriminatory basis. But Tesla has no right to actively prevent usage of someone else's property. If Tesla maintains that they retain some kind of partial ownership and control of a car after the sale, it means you didn't buy it -- you're *leasing* it. You can only drive it as long as Tesla allows you to. They can brick it any time they want, and you have no recourse. It amounts to the same thing as GM terminating the leases on their EV1's. I wonder if Tesla will learn to regret this attitude. For example, what if some sharp attorney sues Tesla as part owner of the car in some tragic accident case? -- Failure is only the opportunity to begin again more intelligently. -- Henry Ford -- Lee Hart's EV projects are at http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Robert Bruninga via EV wrote: This is laughable. Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with. But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage CAR which you OWN. If you want help from Tesla, either do what they want (to give you the help while minimizing their risk) or shut-up and go sit in your car and enjoy your OWNERSHIP as a yard ornament. Except that consumers have rights that the courts have long upheld. 1. Businesses must sell to consumers on a non-discriminatory basis. They can't blacklist certain people. 2. Consumers have a reasonable expectation of fitness for use. I.e. a company can't sell something that they rigged so the customer can't use it for its normal intended purpose. Tesla is a young company. The young often make stupid mistakes. Hopefully, this attitude is a mistake that Tesla will learn from. -- Failure is only the opportunity to begin again more intelligently. -- Henry Ford -- Lee Hart's EV projects are at http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Russ Sciville via EV wrote: I can understand why Tesla are a bit twitchy about people re-building accident damaged cars as the main cell pack under the floor could be damaged. No, it's not surprising. But *all* car companies have had the same worries since time immemorial. For that matter, anyone who sells anything can worry about the new owner misusing it, and coming back to the original owner for compensation. But, the whole point of transferring a title is to officially change ownership. It it mighty hard to get any kind of damages from an original owner unless one can show that there was fraud or misrepresentation. -- Failure is only the opportunity to begin again more intelligently. -- Henry Ford -- Lee Hart's EV projects are at http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
For all we know the car probably de-activated itself safely so that rescue teams don't get electrocuted. Tesla for sure wouldn't just put an on/off switch there so you could switch it back on now would they? Most cars can do this using inertia switches which can be re-set. Tesla probably prefer to do it over the air if the accident was minor. On Thu, 2/10/14, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video) To: Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu Cc: Electric Vehicle Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org Date: Thursday, 2 October, 2014, 14:42 Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it off in the first place. My argument is thus (and obviously) that they had no business disabling the car in the first place. It was not their car. I fail to understand how people can justify someone else disabling a car that they own. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu wrote: This is laughable. Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with. But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage CAR which you OWN. If you want help from Tesla, either do what they want (to give you the help while minimizing their risk) or shut-up and go sit in your car and enjoy your OWNERSHIP as a yard ornament. Bob On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I absolutely disagree. If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's problem. You could disassemble it, turn it into a fish tank, build it into a transformer, whatever. Saying that the car is complex does not change the question of ownership. When you sell something you give up interest in the object you sold. It is gone; it is no longer yours. Now, it is perfectly acceptable to offer warranties and other incentives. These things do not dilute the ownership question but rather provide some route for extra support after the sale. In all the cases we're currently hearing about the people with the cars are NOT trying to assert any warranty claims at all. They just want to fix their own car. Let's say that some safety systems are not working. If that is the case the car should know about it. This is not 1950. Cars have complicated diagnostic systems as well as complicated safety systems. Some cars even tell you which light is burnt out so you don't have to guess when it happens. If Tesla did even a half assed job of making their cars then it'll know if any of the sensors or systems seem to be malfunctioning. At that point it can warn the owner of the vehicle that something still isn't right. Often you are allowed to drive anyway so long as the problem isn't too dire. There is no need for Tesla to inspect the vehicle's sensors and computer systems. They do that themselves. The more pertinent problem here is likely the frame of the car. If it is cracked in half nothing else in the car is likely to know about it until the car tears in two. So, I could see someone being nervous about that. That's why the DMV will want the car's structure and suspension to be inspected before it is licensed for on-the-road use. Tesla has nothing to do with that. No, all of this is just Tesla being overbearing control freaks. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
It is a good thing when a vehicle like a Tesla disables itself in an accident. Even my conversion does that. I have an inertial switch to disconnect the traction pack in the event of an accident. Now, in my case, I just need to reset that sensor. I'm sure Tesla has something much more exotic. However, I don't think you can argue against disabling the output of an 85 kWh pack during an accident! Mike On October 2, 2014 7:42:01 AM MDT, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it off in the first place. My argument is thus (and obviously) that they had no business disabling the car in the first place. It was not their car. I fail to understand how people can justify someone else disabling a car that they own. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu wrote: This is laughable. Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with. But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage CAR which you OWN. If you want help from Tesla, either do what they want (to give you the help while minimizing their risk) or shut-up and go sit in your car and enjoy your OWNERSHIP as a yard ornament. Bob On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I absolutely disagree. If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car) then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's problem. You could disassemble it, turn it into a fish tank, build it into a transformer, whatever. Saying that the car is complex does not change the question of ownership. When you sell something you give up interest in the object you sold. It is gone; it is no longer yours. Now, it is perfectly acceptable to offer warranties and other incentives. These things do not dilute the ownership question but rather provide some route for extra support after the sale. In all the cases we're currently hearing about the people with the cars are NOT trying to assert any warranty claims at all. They just want to fix their own car. Let's say that some safety systems are not working. If that is the case the car should know about it. This is not 1950. Cars have complicated diagnostic systems as well as complicated safety systems. Some cars even tell you which light is burnt out so you don't have to guess when it happens. If Tesla did even a half assed job of making their cars then it'll know if any of the sensors or systems seem to be malfunctioning. At that point it can warn the owner of the vehicle that something still isn't right. Often you are allowed to drive anyway so long as the problem isn't too dire. There is no need for Tesla to inspect the vehicle's sensors and computer systems. They do that themselves. The more pertinent problem here is likely the frame of the car. If it is cracked in half nothing else in the car is likely to know about it until the car tears in two. So, I could see someone being nervous about that. That's why the DMV will want the car's structure and suspension to be inspected before it is licensed for on-the-road use. Tesla has nothing to do with that. No, all of this is just Tesla being overbearing control freaks. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service. Lawrence Harris This is also stupid and many people want a law (right to repair) to fix this sort of issue. I'm sure that their stated reason for doing VIN locking is to prevent chop shops from parting out people's vehicles. That's still a stupid reason and really a lie. I seriously doubt that the OEM cares about chop shops. They care about
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On 10/02/2014 01:15 PM, Lee Hart via EV wrote: Except that consumers have rights that the courts have long upheld. 1. Businesses must sell to consumers on a non-discriminatory basis. They can't blacklist certain people. No but I suppose they CAN refuse to sell some parts to anybody which is what they're claiming. I know that there are some laws in the US that require manufacturers to sell parts to any repair facility (to prevent the situation where cars can ONLY be repaired by their own dealers) but I honestly don't know the details or if Tesla is violating them here. 2. Consumers have a reasonable expectation of fitness for use. I.e. a company can't sell something that they rigged so the customer can't use it for its normal intended purpose. That's true but the company who sold something here is the salvage company. And I heard that the guy who bought the car is thinking of suing them. If Tesla sticks to its guns then what happens is that no wrecked Teslas are salvageable and as scrap they are less valuable. That means the insurance companies will lose more money whenever they declare a car a total loss which means everyone who owns a Tesla will be paying more for insurance. No, it's not surprising. But *all* car companies have had the same worries since time immemorial. For that matter, anyone who sells anything can worry about the new owner misusing it, and coming back to the original owner for compensation. But, the whole point of transferring a title is to officially change ownership. It it mighty hard to get any kind of damages from an original owner unless one can show that there was fraud or misrepresentation. Original owner, perhaps but not necessarily the manufacturer. In the early 80's nearly every company building small airplanes in the US stopped because they were getting crushed by liability costs. They were losing (or at least spending a lot of money defending) lawsuits based on claims of negligence during the manufacture of planes built back as far as 1940! They only started building again after congress passed a law limited their liability to 18 years. I think the only thing that keeps that from being such a big issue in the automotive world is that few cars last that long and the manufacturers have a lot more money to defend themselves. But even so, I bet Ford and GM are named in plenty of lawsuits following some fiery crash of vehicles of nearly any age. Tesla is still a very small player and significant liability exposure could hurt them. --Rick ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Mike Nickerson wrote: It is a good thing when a vehicle like a Tesla disables itself in an accident. Even my conversion does that. I have an inertial switch to disconnect the traction pack in the event of an accident. Now, in my case, I just need to reset that sensor. I'm sure Tesla has something much more exotic. However, I don't think you can argue against disabling the output of an 85 kWh pack during an accident! Let's consider this statement for a minute. The energy content of gasoline is 32.4MJ/L, and 1MJ=0.28kWh; so, a 10 (US) gallon tank of ordinary gasoline contains 343kWh of energy, and yet every other auto manufacturer has *millions* of vehicles on the road with a manually-resettable-by-anyone inertia switch to disable this energy source in the event of a sufficiently serious accident. Yes, a means of automatically disabling/disconnecting the traction pack in the event of an accident makes sense for ~any~ EV, however, there is no obvious justification for this feature not being manually resettable without the assistance of the manufacturer. It seems reasonable that the vehicle might have the intelligence to refuse to re-enable should its onboard diagnostics determine that something is unsafe or defective with its systems (in the same way that a manually-resettable circuit breaker will immediately re-open if the a fault condition persists), but again it is not obvious that there is any need for the involvement of the manufacturer. Cheers, Roger. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
How did a car titled as salvage(junk) get changed to salvageable in this discussion? David Kerzel ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
It is very common. People buy cars with a salvage title and fix them. Then they have the car inspected. I believe that the local PD does it in Michigan. You call the police and have them come out. They make sure that it has the things it is supposed to (tail lights, turn signals, etc) and that you are the actual owner. You can petition to get the car allowable to be on the road again. You can get almost anything on the road in Michigan. My father bought an off-road vehicle from Polaris and then added proper road tires, turn signals, and an E-brake and the DMV lets him drive it on the local roads now - it has a plate and everything. Back on the point, this is what people do. Generally you are allowed to buy a salvage title car and fix it up so that it is once again road worthy. The local PD and DMV are the judges of that - the auto maker has nothing to do with it. On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:10 PM, David Kerzel via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: How did a car titled as salvage(junk) get changed to salvageable in this discussion? David Kerzel ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/84eef873/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On Oct 2, 2014, at 10:20 AM, Lee Hart via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: But, the whole point of transferring a title is to officially change ownership. It it mighty hard to get any kind of damages from an original owner unless one can show that there was fraud or misrepresentation. And, in this case, in which Tesla can, at its own whim, disable or even destroy the vehicle with no input nor recourse from the purported owner, it's very arguable that there is, in fact, both misrepresentation and a failure to properly transfer full possession. When you buy an house, yes, you get it re-keyed right away...but, if the original owner fails to give you all the keys and then uses one to gain illicit access, the fecal matter is going to hit the impeller with full force. Tesla should separate their post-sale services from the sale of the vehicle itself, ideally with an hardware switch of some kind. There are, of course, theft and similar security concerns, but it still should be possible for the legitimate owner to make it physically impossible for Tesla or anybody else to modify the vehicle, and for the vehicle to remain at least as functional as it did when it left the dealer's lot. And, if they're smart, they'll charge a nominal fee for the regular over-the-air update service, just to underscore the point, even if they offer discounts and rebates and the like such that nobody actually pays a dime. However, I predict it'll take a lawsuit and / or some bad PR or the like to get them to fix this literally fatal-to-the-car flaw in their product...and that's assuming they don't double down and buy a bunch of lawmakers in the mean time, which would be _really_ bad for the rest of us b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/e997c39f/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On Oct 2, 2014, at 12:15 PM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: It is very common. People buy cars with a salvage title and fix them. Exactly -- the car basically becomes a kit and / or homemade car...very much like the overwhelming majority of EVs owned by the people reading these words, save that the sleds might or might not have had quite so dramatic an history. It's also worth noting that a salvage title only happens when the car is totaled by the insurance company: when the cost to repair is more than the value the car is insured for. That can happen from cosmetic damage, or from damage limited to an easily-repairable but expensive part, like an engine. For example, try to drive the car across a flooded wash, suck water into the intake, and the engine is dead...but the rest of the car may well still be in perfect condition. Insurance might not be willing to pay the price to replace the engine, and the owner might not care to, either, so the car is totaled...but somebody else might even have a perfectly-serviceable engine sitting on the shelf and be happy to drop it into the car and drive away. And, think about it: wouldn't one of the ultimate DIY EV projects be to resurrect one of the flagship commercial models? Ignoring this remote-disable nonsense, who _wouldn't_ want a Tesla? Imagine some pimply-faced teenager scouring the junkyard for the hotrod of her dreams, towing it home, and bringing it back to life over the course of the next year or so with money she saves from her job as a clerk at the auto parts store. How is what this guy is trying to do any different? ...except, of course, that Tesla took the keys, still has them, and won't give them up, and designed the car in such a way that you can't reasonably replace the lock without their help that they won't give. b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141002/d89e1e12/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
A copy of the form was attached to the original news item I read about this so I have read it. It doesn't say Tesla can take his car but it does say that before they would reactivate the car he had to take it to Tesla to be inspected at his expense (other sources say that Tesla says they won't charge for this but the form clearly states it's at his expense). If they're happy with the inspection they'll reactive the car. If they feel it needs additional repairs he has to take it to a Tesla service center for those repairs before they'll reactivate it. Or finally, they may decide that it's beyond repair and they will refuse to reactivate it. That last could be construed as taking his car because it will be basically worthless at that point. Tesla's stated position is that they're concerned about safety, but that's not really their problem any more. He'll need to get it inspected by the state before it can be declared roadworthy. There are a couple of 'hack the Tesla' groups out there. I think we'll need them if anyone expects to do anything with used Teslas. --Rick On 09/29/2014 02:19 PM, EVDL Administrator via EV wrote: On 28 Sep 2014 at 20:32, Robert Bruninga via EV wrote: If the guy wants to hack a tesla, then simply sign the form. Done. Simply sign the form? It isn't that simple. On 28 Sep 2014 at 2:12, brucedp5 via EV wrote: ... he says the company wanted him to sign liability waiver that allows the automaker to ultimately determine the car´s roadworthiness. Rutman says ... that it would allow Tesla to confiscate the vehicle if they felt it wasn´t safe ... Tesla [says] ... nothing in the inspection authorization form they wanted Rutman to sign would have let them take his car away. That's a legal document you're talking about. If the owner is correct, he would be effectively giving up the ownership rights he paid for. Maybe I'm overly cautious, but I'm not like the folks who click right through software agreements. I actually read them so I know what I'm giving up. A couple of times, I've decided I don't need that program that badly after all. I also read mortgages before I sign them - all legal documents, in fact. If I were the owner here, I'd take that document to an attorney for an independent expert interpretation. If it really does allow Tesla to take the car on their unilateral determination that it's unsafe, it's an outrage. Tesla claims it doesn't really say that. Fine, but it wouldn't be the first time that a corporation said soothingly Just trust us, when the legal fine print said don't. David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On 1 Oct 2014 at 11:01, Rick Beebe via EV wrote: If they're happy with the inspection they'll reactive the car. Control freaks. Maybe other folks are fine with this. More power to you, no pun intended. But blast it, I already have enough things in my life that spy on me and/or restrict my rights, even though I've paid for them and SHOULD own and control them. I don't need one more. Bummer, because Tesla makes a nice EV. Not that I could afford one anyway, but still. BTW, a lot of EV folks cheered Tesla on in their spat with that reporter who tried to trash-talk the car. But the whole We know what you did, you drove in circles in a parking lot to kill the battery deal was just plain creepy. David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
I think the whole thing comes down to: - who owns the car and consequently - who is responsible if there is a safety issue with the car? If the answer is: the driver, then Tesla has no right to restrict the owner from doing with the car what he wants. What if he wants to drive the car only on his private property, because it is not allowed on public roads? Plenty of vehicles can only be used on private property far that reason and who is Tesla to take away the rights to the enjoyment of the car owner? On the other hand - if liability rests with Tesla then they are right to require inspection before re-enabling, because at least part ownership of the consequence of that enabling lies with them. As it looks now, they are only refusing to enable the car out of concern for their brand image... Cor van de Water Chief Scientist Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com Email: cwa...@proxim.com Private: http://www.cvandewater.info Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626 -Original Message- From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of EVDL Administrator via EV Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 1:55 PM To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video) On 1 Oct 2014 at 11:01, Rick Beebe via EV wrote: If they're happy with the inspection they'll reactive the car. Control freaks. Maybe other folks are fine with this. More power to you, no pun intended. But blast it, I already have enough things in my life that spy on me and/or restrict my rights, even though I've paid for them and SHOULD own and control them. I don't need one more. Bummer, because Tesla makes a nice EV. Not that I could afford one anyway, but still. BTW, a lot of EV folks cheered Tesla on in their spat with that reporter who tried to trash-talk the car. But the whole We know what you did, you drove in circles in a parking lot to kill the battery deal was just plain creepy. David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On Oct 1, 2014, at 2:23 PM, Cor van de Water via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: As it looks now, they are only refusing to enable the car out of concern for their brand image... Ironically enough, they may well be doing their brand image more harm with their current actions than if they were to work with the guy b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141001/23d2500c/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
disagree. Sounds like to me they are perfectly willing to work with the guy. But the guy is unwilling to work with them... bob On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Ben Goren via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On Oct 1, 2014, at 2:23 PM, Cor van de Water via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: As it looks now, they are only refusing to enable the car out of concern for their brand image... Ironically enough, they may well be doing their brand image more harm with their current actions than if they were to work with the guy b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141001/23d2500c/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141001/86502b8f/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I read the 'at your cost' part to mean at a minimum that Tesla would not pay to transport the car from where ever it was to a suitable testing facility whether they would charge for the inspection or not. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service. Lawrence Harris On Oct 1, 2014, at 2:41 PM, Robert Bruninga via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: disagree. Sounds like to me they are perfectly willing to work with the guy. But the guy is unwilling to work with them... bob On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Ben Goren via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: On Oct 1, 2014, at 2:23 PM, Cor van de Water via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: As it looks now, they are only refusing to enable the car out of concern for their brand image... Ironically enough, they may well be doing their brand image more harm with their current actions than if they were to work with the guy b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141001/23d2500c/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20141001/86502b8f/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Even my 2000 Volvo V70 XC has parts like the throttle body that are flashed to the VIN of the car. Makes it impossible to use used parts. Pretty much forces you to the dealer also. Mike On October 1, 2014 4:04:24 PM MDT, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on making sure all these system, some of them safety systems, are working. Tesla says let us take a look, if it's all ok we will reactive the car, if not you have the choice of getting them fixed or abandoning the project. I read the 'at your cost' part to mean at a minimum that Tesla would not pay to transport the car from where ever it was to a suitable testing facility whether they would charge for the inspection or not. As an aside I had a similar talk with Mercedes when the onboard computer in my car got fried (wiring issue - their fault out of warrantee and no recall). I tried to get a replacement from the wreckers and was told sorry, the computer is flashed to the VIN of the car and unless I replace 'all' the various interlinked components including the keys it won't work - only a new computer will work. Talking to my non dealer mechanic he said many of the new cars are like this and there are system he can't easily service. Lawrence Harris ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
I agree completely. However, there was a passing mention in the original post about Otmar's Stretchla. I would think Otmar would have no problem signing such a document. So what's up, Otmar? Has your drive line upgrade hit a snag? Chris On Sep 28, 2014 8:33 PM, Robert Bruninga via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: This is a no brainer. The value of the Tesla brand is extremely high. The negative value and media feeding frenzie of a hacker-induced fire, crash, or ANYTHING that would spoil the brand name is simply not worth the risk. I don't blame Tesla. If the guy wants to hack a tesla, then simply sign the form. Done. Bob On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 5:12 AM, brucedp5 via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: 'I am blacklisted by Tesla all across the country' *** Buyer beware - Caveat emptor *** % Tesla running 'GM-liability-scared' a petty-parts case of the 'Sue Me, Sue You Blues' The media stink caused Tesla react *** Otmar was Tesla-tortured before this % http://gas2.org/2014/09/27/tesla-wont-activate-mans-salvaged-model-s/ Tesla Won’t Activate Man’s Salvaged Model S [2014/09/27] [image http://gas2.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/salvage-tesla.png salvage-tesla video flash ] Starting at $70,000, the Tesla Model S costs more than twice what Americans spend on the average new car, meaning most people that plain old can’t afford it. This has led some people to take desperate measures, such as repairing a salvage titled Model S, though a San Diego man is learning the hard way that it isn’t quite that easy. San Diego 6 News reported the plight of Peter Rutman, who spent $50,000 on a damaged Tesla Model S, and then invested another $8,000 into repair it. But when Rutman contacted Tesla about reactivating the car’s complicated software, he says the company wanted him to sign liability waiver that allows the automaker to ultimately determine the car’s roadworthiness. Rutman says the document didn’t say anything about fixing or repairing the car to accept a charge, and that it would allow Tesla to confiscate the vehicle if they felt it wasn’t safe. Rutman refused to sign, and as such says he’s been blacklisted by Tesla stores nationwide, meaning he can’t get parts of technical assistance. For its part, Tesla has serious safety concerns regarding the salvaged electric vehicle, but nothing in the inspection authorization form they wanted Rutman to sign would have let them take his car away. Tesla also says Rutman had his vehicle repaired by a non-authorized Tesla installer, and while he isn’t blacklisted, the company doesn’t sell certain parts that require special training to install to just anyone. Compare that to traditional automakers, which will sell you literally every piece you need to build a car, except in the case of specialty vehicles such as the Camaro Z/28. Rutman isn’t the only one to run afoul of Tesla’s parts counter and technical service though; a recent attempt to build a Tesla-powered stretched-wheelbase Volkswagen Westfalia (the “Stretchla”) has run into issues with Tesla as well. Because Tesla owns all its own stores and service centers, there’s no outside network for people who want to fix or re-engineer Model S components for their own purposes. Rutman has decided to try and sue the salvage auction that sold him the Model S, since California state law says if a car can’t be made roadworthy, it must be scrapped. The takeaway here? For those car modifiers who want to use a Tesla drivetrain for an EV conversion of their own, buyer beware. Rutman found out the hard way that the rules that apply to conventional cars don’t always apply to EVs, and especially not Teslas. Also I’d like to note, for the $58,000 Rutman spent, he was just $2,000 shy of what a base 60 kWh Model S would have cost, once Federal ($7,500) and state ($2,500) tax credits were factored in. As the old saying goes, penny wise, pound foolish. [© gas2.org] http://www.sandiego6.com/news/local/San-Diego-mans-58000-nightmare-with-a-Tesla-Model-S-277017201.html San Diego man's $58,000 nightmare with Tesla Model S By Derek Staahl Sep 24, 2014 SAN DIEGO -- A San Diego man bought a high-end Tesla at auction for nearly half price, but now he can't get the company to activate the car. Peter Rutman purchased the 2012 Model S Signature at auction in March for $50,000 then spent another $8,000 fixing it. He says repairing the car has been easy; dealing with Tesla has been the challenge. I'm blacklisted all across the country, he said. Nobody's allowed to help us. They're not allowed to sell us parts. They're not allowed to service the car. Nothing. Rutman's Model S is a salvage title car, meaning an insurance company determined the vehicle was a total loss. Salvage titles are a notoriously risky proposition, but Rutman's case
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On 28 Sep 2014 at 20:32, Robert Bruninga via EV wrote: If the guy wants to hack a tesla, then simply sign the form. Done. Simply sign the form? It isn't that simple. On 28 Sep 2014 at 2:12, brucedp5 via EV wrote: ... he says the company wanted him to sign liability waiver that allows the automaker to ultimately determine the car´s roadworthiness. Rutman says ... that it would allow Tesla to confiscate the vehicle if they felt it wasn´t safe ... Tesla [says] ... nothing in the inspection authorization form they wanted Rutman to sign would have let them take his car away. That's a legal document you're talking about. If the owner is correct, he would be effectively giving up the ownership rights he paid for. Maybe I'm overly cautious, but I'm not like the folks who click right through software agreements. I actually read them so I know what I'm giving up. A couple of times, I've decided I don't need that program that badly after all. I also read mortgages before I sign them - all legal documents, in fact. If I were the owner here, I'd take that document to an attorney for an independent expert interpretation. If it really does allow Tesla to take the car on their unilateral determination that it's unsafe, it's an outrage. Tesla claims it doesn't really say that. Fine, but it wouldn't be the first time that a corporation said soothingly Just trust us, when the legal fine print said don't. David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Tesla's response: Safety is Tesla’s top priority and it is a principle on which we refuse to compromise under any circumstance. Mr. Rutman purchased a vehicle on the salvage market that had been substantially damaged in a serious accident. We have strong concerns about this car being safe for the road, but we have been prevented from inspecting the vehicle because Mr. Rutman refused to sign an inspection authorization form. That form clearly states that in order for us to support the vehicle on an ongoing basis, we need to ensure the repairs meet minimum safety standards. Regardless of whether or not the car passed inspection, Mr. Rutman would have been free to decide where to conduct any additional repairs and to leave with his vehicle. There was never any threat to take away his vehicle at the inspection or any time thereafter and there is nothing in the authorization form that states or implies that we would do so. Additionally, Mr. Rutman opted to have his vehicle repaired by a non-Tesla affiliated facility. We work with a network of authorized independent repair facilities to ensure our safety standards are met. It is also worth noting that Mr. Rutman is not on any “blacklist” for purchasing Tesla parts. While we do sell certain parts over the counter, we do not sell any parts that require specific training to install. This is a policy that is common among automakers and it is in place to protect customers from the risk of repairs not meeting our safety standards. -- View this message in context: http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EValert-Don-t-buy-a-salvaged-Tesla-EV-to-repair-drive-video-tp4671831p4671859.html Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
To my ears, this has a faint but uncomfortable echo of GM's policies with the EV1: you may have leased the EV, but WE control its fate. Tesla's policies here echo where many other corporations are headed, and not just in EVs or even just in automobiles. It's no longer enough for you to buy the product; they also want to ensure that you're locked in to providing them with a constant, reliable stream of future income as long as you own that product. Basically, they want you to buy the car, but rent the right to drive it. And it's not just Tesla; it's all the manufacturers. Products that constantly phone home to their manufacturers sound like a great idea. Tesla can warn you if something's wrong, and track your car if someone steals it. They can improve your car with updated software while you sleep. You can monitor the car's charging progress, and pre-cool the car from your mobile phone. But Tesla can also decide that you're not sufficiently subservient to their rules, and - in effect - virtually confiscate the car you paid them for. The Renault Zoe has a rather less veiled version of this manufacturer control. If you don't pay your battery rental, they'll disable the battery, effectively bricking your car. IMO, any product that you own but don't fully control, you're really just renting. If you're not going to own your EV, IMO you should get more benefits than this from the rental transaction. I'm thinking station cars or car-sharing, where you get (or should get) the right to vehicle flexibility. For example, if you need to pick up a load of wood at the lumberyard, you can swap your commuter EV for a pickup truck for the weekend. Or if you're taking a vacation with the whole family, you can exchange your EV for an ICEV for 2 weeks. And don't forget, there are still millions of older ICEVs out there that are NOT locked to their manufacturers for anything - parts or otherwise. Relieve them of their grimy bits, drop in a generic motor and controller and batteries, and you have an EV that you genuinely, truly control. Something to think about, no? David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Given the path Tesla has taken with software - I can't see how they manage off the grid salvage units. If they interact with such - what liability do they take on? A solution is maybe an open source OS for the car, something that runs it, but it takes Tesla off the hook - which is obviously how it has to be; and puts the EV owner on the hook - which is necessary if you are going to salvage such a thing - off the grid so to speak. I don't know what GMs motivation was with the EV1, I assume very proprietary based on nothing; or what Tesla's is now. I tend to think there is less evil empire with Tesla and more having to conform to existing and maybe silly rules and regs. It is unfortunate, but I understand why they would prefer this...for now. Musk really wants EVs everywhere. But as always the DIY side is not much of a concern. Congress mandates that OEMs have to support the existence of an aftermarket. Telas will have to deal with this somehow. I have know idea what it looks like. If cars were still pretty dumb, with no digital IP, there would be a lot less difficulty. If wishes were fishes On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 12:52 PM, EVDL Administrator via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: To my ears, this has a faint but uncomfortable echo of GM's policies with the EV1: you may have leased the EV, but WE control its fate. Tesla's policies here echo where many other corporations are headed, and not just in EVs or even just in automobiles. It's no longer enough for you to buy the product; they also want to ensure that you're locked in to providing them with a constant, reliable stream of future income as long as you own that product. Basically, they want you to buy the car, but rent the right to drive it. And it's not just Tesla; it's all the manufacturers. Products that constantly phone home to their manufacturers sound like a great idea. Tesla can warn you if something's wrong, and track your car if someone steals it. They can improve your car with updated software while you sleep. You can monitor the car's charging progress, and pre-cool the car from your mobile phone. But Tesla can also decide that you're not sufficiently subservient to their rules, and - in effect - virtually confiscate the car you paid them for. The Renault Zoe has a rather less veiled version of this manufacturer control. If you don't pay your battery rental, they'll disable the battery, effectively bricking your car. IMO, any product that you own but don't fully control, you're really just renting. If you're not going to own your EV, IMO you should get more benefits than this from the rental transaction. I'm thinking station cars or car-sharing, where you get (or should get) the right to vehicle flexibility. For example, if you need to pick up a load of wood at the lumberyard, you can swap your commuter EV for a pickup truck for the weekend. Or if you're taking a vacation with the whole family, you can exchange your EV for an ICEV for 2 weeks. And don't forget, there are still millions of older ICEVs out there that are NOT locked to their manufacturers for anything - parts or otherwise. Relieve them of their grimy bits, drop in a generic motor and controller and batteries, and you have an EV that you genuinely, truly control. Something to think about, no? David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -- Put this question to yourself: should I use everyone else to attain happiness, or should I help others gain happiness? *Dalai Lama * Tell me what it is you plan to do With your one wild and precious life? Mary Oliver, The summer day. To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk. Thomas A. Edison http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/thomasaed125362.html A public-opinion poll is no substitute for thought. *Warren Buffet* Michael E. Ross (919) 550-2430 Land (919) 576-0824 https://www.google.com/voice/b/0?pli=1#phones Google Phone (919) 631-1451 Cell (919) 513-0418 Desk michael.e.r...@gmail.com michael.e.r...@gmail.com -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20140928/cd767621/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
Does this problem relate to Tesla’s battles with states that require independent dealers? Surely an independent Tesla dealer would just sell him the parts. n -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20140928/09f11945/attachment.htm ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On 28 Sep 2014 at 11:19, Nathan Loofbourrow via EV wrote: Surely an independent Tesla dealer would just sell him the parts. Is there a law that requires that they do so? Otherwise, Tesla could fix that problem by requiring dealers to sign agreements not to sell parts to anyone other than approved service facilities. David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to evpost and etpost addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
On Sep 28, 2014, at 11:34 AM, EVDL Administrator via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: Surely an independent Tesla dealer would just sell him the parts. Is there a law that requires that they do so? That's getting into questions of anti-trust and safety and environmental regulations and similar laws. They may, in fact, be legally obligated to sell to anybody; or they might be legally prohibited from selling to anybody but a select, certified, few. Ultimately, it's first a question of whether or not they want to sell; then, if not, whether or not anybody wants to try to force them to sell; then, how good the competing legal teams are; and, perhaps, how good the various K Street connections are. b -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20140928/9ff5590d/attachment.pgp ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive! (video)
This is a no brainer. The value of the Tesla brand is extremely high. The negative value and media feeding frenzie of a hacker-induced fire, crash, or ANYTHING that would spoil the brand name is simply not worth the risk. I don't blame Tesla. If the guy wants to hack a tesla, then simply sign the form. Done. Bob On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 5:12 AM, brucedp5 via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote: 'I am blacklisted by Tesla all across the country' *** Buyer beware - Caveat emptor *** % Tesla running 'GM-liability-scared' a petty-parts case of the 'Sue Me, Sue You Blues' The media stink caused Tesla react *** Otmar was Tesla-tortured before this % http://gas2.org/2014/09/27/tesla-wont-activate-mans-salvaged-model-s/ Tesla Won’t Activate Man’s Salvaged Model S [2014/09/27] [image http://gas2.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/salvage-tesla.png salvage-tesla video flash ] Starting at $70,000, the Tesla Model S costs more than twice what Americans spend on the average new car, meaning most people that plain old can’t afford it. This has led some people to take desperate measures, such as repairing a salvage titled Model S, though a San Diego man is learning the hard way that it isn’t quite that easy. San Diego 6 News reported the plight of Peter Rutman, who spent $50,000 on a damaged Tesla Model S, and then invested another $8,000 into repair it. But when Rutman contacted Tesla about reactivating the car’s complicated software, he says the company wanted him to sign liability waiver that allows the automaker to ultimately determine the car’s roadworthiness. Rutman says the document didn’t say anything about fixing or repairing the car to accept a charge, and that it would allow Tesla to confiscate the vehicle if they felt it wasn’t safe. Rutman refused to sign, and as such says he’s been blacklisted by Tesla stores nationwide, meaning he can’t get parts of technical assistance. For its part, Tesla has serious safety concerns regarding the salvaged electric vehicle, but nothing in the inspection authorization form they wanted Rutman to sign would have let them take his car away. Tesla also says Rutman had his vehicle repaired by a non-authorized Tesla installer, and while he isn’t blacklisted, the company doesn’t sell certain parts that require special training to install to just anyone. Compare that to traditional automakers, which will sell you literally every piece you need to build a car, except in the case of specialty vehicles such as the Camaro Z/28. Rutman isn’t the only one to run afoul of Tesla’s parts counter and technical service though; a recent attempt to build a Tesla-powered stretched-wheelbase Volkswagen Westfalia (the “Stretchla”) has run into issues with Tesla as well. Because Tesla owns all its own stores and service centers, there’s no outside network for people who want to fix or re-engineer Model S components for their own purposes. Rutman has decided to try and sue the salvage auction that sold him the Model S, since California state law says if a car can’t be made roadworthy, it must be scrapped. The takeaway here? For those car modifiers who want to use a Tesla drivetrain for an EV conversion of their own, buyer beware. Rutman found out the hard way that the rules that apply to conventional cars don’t always apply to EVs, and especially not Teslas. Also I’d like to note, for the $58,000 Rutman spent, he was just $2,000 shy of what a base 60 kWh Model S would have cost, once Federal ($7,500) and state ($2,500) tax credits were factored in. As the old saying goes, penny wise, pound foolish. [© gas2.org] http://www.sandiego6.com/news/local/San-Diego-mans-58000-nightmare-with-a-Tesla-Model-S-277017201.html San Diego man's $58,000 nightmare with Tesla Model S By Derek Staahl Sep 24, 2014 SAN DIEGO -- A San Diego man bought a high-end Tesla at auction for nearly half price, but now he can't get the company to activate the car. Peter Rutman purchased the 2012 Model S Signature at auction in March for $50,000 then spent another $8,000 fixing it. He says repairing the car has been easy; dealing with Tesla has been the challenge. I'm blacklisted all across the country, he said. Nobody's allowed to help us. They're not allowed to sell us parts. They're not allowed to service the car. Nothing. Rutman's Model S is a salvage title car, meaning an insurance company determined the vehicle was a total loss. Salvage titles are a notoriously risky proposition, but Rutman's case appears to illustrate something unusual: no alternatives. Tesla has created a situation where there is nowhere to go. They've blocked every avenue, he said. Unlike other automakers, Tesla has a direct-sales model. That means car buyers must deal directly with the company, not independent dealers. And in the case of a dispute, the buyer has virtually no alternatives, according to industry experts. Rutman says he needs a
