Not going to debate the law here, but just so it's understood, you should probably read Magnusson-Moss if you want to try and claim it.
Obviously, I
DID read it. Did you?
Section 2302(c), which applies to limited warranties as well as full warranties:
(c) Prohibition on conditions for written or implied warranty; waiver by Commission.
No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name; except that the prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the Commission if -
(1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted product will function properly only if the article or service so identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and
(2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public interest. The Commission shall identify in the Federal Register, and permit public comment on, all applications for waiver of the prohibition of this subsection, and shall publish in the Federal Register its disposition of any such application, including the reasons therefor.
The warranty on the Tesla Model S is a new vehicle _limited_ warranty and is "conspicuously designated" as such, therefore it is not subject to the federal definition of a "full warranty".
Irrelevant.
- - - Updated - - -
Tesla isn't stupid. You don't spend $700M to develop a vehicle then fail basic contract and warranty law, especially given the new nature of the technology beneath.
That's a stupid assumption. We know for a fact that Tesla is violating federal copyright law, with civil penalties of $25,000 per car sold. I've been polite in not reporting it to the copyright holders yet. We know for a fact that Tesla violated Washington State deposit escrow law until they were caught. (EDIT: I withdraw the foregoing statement; I would have to recheck Tesla's annual reports, it may be the case that Tesla complied with Washington state deposit escrow law from day one.) We know for a fact that Tesla hasn't bothered to research the motor vehicle manufacturer and dealer laws in half the states in the US (it's right there in their annual report).
I think it's actually quite clear that Tesla's general policy is to not even research the law until they get caught. This does save money. To be clear, I think that Tesla takes a different approach when it comes to *car safety* laws, but when it comes to other laws, their record is clear.
I'm sure they have their i's dotted and t's crossed and zero's slashed, and they even use the little stroke through the center of the "7" to distinguish it from the "1".
Given the examples above, I'm 100% sure they don't.
- - - Updated - - -
As for Tesla and contract law, getting operational and support stuff like this wrong is par for the course for Tech Startups. Make the product as cool as possible and get it out the door as quick as possible is the only thing they care about. All that other ops/support stuff can wait until they are successful and have time and money. That's been my experience anyway.
Probably true, which is why I'm optimistic about Tesla. Still, now is the time for them to start getting this stuff right...
- - - Updated - - -
On the first part, you're correct - you can't have sales tie-ins as a condition of warranty. Other consumer protection laws (*not* M-M) require automotive manufacturers (inc. Tesla) to make available maintenance procedures and training for completing them.
Right. (It would be interesting to see which laws.) Has Tesla done so yet? We await the manuals.
However, Tesla CAN dictate that certain maintenance items be performed by a qualified person, and then place the burden of proof upon you (the owner) or your agent to prove qualification -- Tesla will not have to prove disqualification.
Maybe some people would have trouble proving that, but some of us are anal-retentive perfectionists who keep records of everything, and would have no trouble whatsoever proving it.
Except, of course, for Tesla's failure to specify maintenance procedures.
So expect an uphill battle trying to convince any court or jury (if you can past the matter-of-law elements) that any joe-blow SAE trained ICE mechanic is qualified to maintain a Model S. In the first year, it practical terms it means you will have to use Tesla's service.
This is, as I say, dancing on the border of violating federal law. It's nowhere near as cut-and-dried a case as the copyright license violations, of course.
- - - Updated - - -
My major problem with this whole deal is not so much the $600 per se, but the fact that the cost of this thing keeps rising seemingly monthly for the buyer.
I add this up much more conservatively, but still, the price of the car is
49,900 + 7500 (no we don't all get to use the tax credit) + 990 (mandatory) + 180 (mandatory) = $58,570 before tax.
And now, we find that they will try not to honor the warranty unless you spend an extra $600 (absolutely minimum, assuming that they actually provide manuals and training after the first year):
= $59,170 before tax.
The advertised price is a fake. Luckily, I *expected* it to be a fake from day one, because every car company pulls this garbage. But still.
- - - Updated - - -
I've read a bunch of pages on this thread, but I'm still looking for some clarity on the situation.
Does the service plan have any impact on warranty?
Legally, no, because for it to have an impact legally would be a violation of federal law.
In practice, Tesla agents have repeatedly been signalling that they intend not to honor the warranty if you don't get Tesla service. This is scummy behavior.
Other than brake pads and wipers, does purchasing the service plan mean that any parts are covered that would not otherwise be covered by the warranty? If so, what are those parts?
Nobody knows.
Does anyone have an idea about what Tesla plans to do with your car for the annual service?
Apparently, if Roadsters are anything to go by, they will go over it from top to bottom in great detail for their own research purposes, and fix anything they find. It sounds quite thorough.
Is there any way to update the firmware in your car without paying for the annual service?
Yes, according to Tesla.
If you don't get the service plan, does that mean that if your car diagnoses something is wrong, that nobody would know? Wouldn't the car somehow tell you that something was wrong even if you didn't pay for the service?
Yes. Anything which the car can self-diagnose will pop up on the touchscreen.
Is there a reason that the poll doesn't include an option of: the plan isn't worth it to me, but this isn't a reservation-cancelling offense ?
The person who originally made the poll didn't think of the option and has asked if mods could add it after the fact.
