Clean Title but was declared a total loss by insurance. Tesla rep says no supercharging. Are they wrong?

[zlindy]

Hey everyone, first post, and proud owner of my first Tesla as of two weeks ago. Found tons of valuable info here as I was researching, thanks to everyone.

Q: Recently purchased a used 2020 Model 3 SR+ with ~14,000 miles. It has a clean title but Carfax history shows it had a "minor to moderate" collision in late 2021 at the front driver side fender and was claimed "total loss" by insurance at the time. However, it has since been repaired and somehow(?) still has a clean title.

The original owner purchased and drove the car in TX (actually, I think it may have been leased). Best I can tell from the Carfax, after the accident it was sold, fixed, and resold to a second owner in CA. The second owner then traded it into a dealer in CA, which is where I bought it. I've wanted a Model 3 for years now and finally decided to pull the trigger.

We take semi-frequent longer roadtrips (300-500 miles) and so Supercharging is fairly important to us. I did a ton of research before buying a used Model 3 and thought I was safe with this car because despite it having a previous accident, it still has a clean title. We have a roadtrip coming up in about 2 weeks, so I went to test out the Supercharging a few days ago and when I plugged it in, the screen gave me a message "Supercharging Not Enabled. Try AC Charging." Thought it was maybe because I hadn't set up a payment method yet, so I did that, and still received the same message. So I call Tesla and they tell me the vehicle has a salvage title. I explain that I'm aware it had a prior accident but it actually has a clean title. This seemed to shock the rep I was speaking with, and he said he had to talk to his manager and would get back to me. A few days later I get an email from who I assume was his manager and it just said "Our records are not wrong. We cannot clear the title. Call the person you bought the vehicle from."

So now I'm concerned that I may have missed a nuance during my research and that it's not just salvage title vehicles that can't supercharge, but any vehicle that has had an accident or that Tesla deems unfit.
Does anyone know any more detail about being able to supercharge a car with clean title that has had an accident?
Is the Tesla rep I spoke to wrong?
Can they in fact update the title in their system to be clean and re-enable supercharging?
Or is there any sort of inspection I can have them do to clear it for supercharging? If so, any idea on cost?
There are no other public non-Tesla "superchargers" we can use are there?
This would be a huge bummer for us if we couldn't supercharge, hoping I didn't fail in my research and buy a car that can't supercharge :/.

Thank you!

Z

 

[MP3Mike]

Be aware that you have no warranty as well. And it is very clear that the warranty is voided when declared a total loss even if the title isn't branded.

 

[Resist]

Imagine if you bought a repaired ICE vehicle that was declared totaled and weren't allowed to get gas at a station. This whole banned from Supercharging thing because a Tesla was totaled is a bit much. Not sure why Tesla is worried about liability when anyone can sue for whatever they want, even with disclaimers. I'd think Tesla would be more worried about FSD beta drivers killing someone because they didn't pay attention and then suing Tesla, than worry about liability with a totaled car that was repaired.

 

[brainhouston]

I did get a pretty good deal on it. Or so I thought before all of this! We paid $41k. 2020 SR+ w/ 14k miles and FSD package included. Overall I think still a pretty good price, and probably a fair price given the title. Definitely a big bummer on the title and supercharging, but we still love it. It runs and drives like new. We will probably just keep it as our daily driver, with plans to upgrade to a legit clean title LR model down the road. Thanks for all the input and knowledge everyone. I had no idea a title could be washed. A good lesson!

That should have been a red flag

Your car is worth a tiny fraction of the price you paid now that it unable to Supercharge.

Not true, plenty of ppl would buy salvage at reduced price. Someone posted on another thread, they were in same pickle n sold the car in 3 days for more than they paid for.

 

[father_of_6]

That should have been a red flag

Not true, plenty of ppl would buy salvage at reduced price. Someone posted on another thread, they were in same pickle n sold the car in 3 days for more than they paid for.

I wouldn't call that price a red flag. I value FSD at $0, and that same car sold for $38k brand new.

 

[MP3Mike]

I wouldn't call that price a red flag. I value FSD at $0, and that same car sold for $38k brand new.

With a warranty, which he does not have.

 

[brainhouston]

I wouldn't call that price a red flag. I value FSD at $0, and that same car sold for $38k brand new.

well, prices are crazy right now n i don't know the current market honestly, im just going of the fact "it was a good deal"...

 

[thesmokingman]

Dude, it was right there in the sales description and you ignored it?

 

[father_of_6]

well, prices are crazy right now n i don't know the current market honestly, im just going of the fact "it was a good deal"...

I do think that's less than or equal to the going rate for that vehicle, if you value FSD. The used market has been nuts for a while, but I do think it's headed back to normalcy. I don't value FSD at all.

I think best case scenario, they take this car back from you and you get a brand new SR+ for the same price... sans Faux Self Driving.

 

[jjrandorin]

I do think that's less than or equal to the going rate for that vehicle, if you value FSD. The used market has been nuts for a while, but I do think it's headed back to normalcy. I don't value FSD at all.

I think best case scenario, they take this car back from you and you get a brand new SR+ for the same price... sans Faux Self Driving.

Im not a lawyer, and not even going to pretend to be one. With that being said, it seems to me that the dealer disclosed everything they knew, which is that the vehicle WAS declared a total loss (its in the advertisement).

Carfax is also not a "legal" entity, just a business, but they got the information from disclosures somewhere as well. I dont see where the dealer would "have" to do anything, legally. I mean, maybe they might, but I dont think they really need to. The OP states there was an accident disclosure, they disclosed all the information that they knew about the vehicle, etc.

They should contact a lawyer if they are looking to contact the dealer about this. It would be interesting to hear from a lawyer what, if any, recourse there is here.

 

[SageBrush]

Money laundering is illegal. Is Car title laundering also illegal ?
I'll guess that the car dealer had a pretty good idea that the title was laundered since it is reasonable to think that a car dealer would be conversant with title rules and know that a totaled car cannot have a clean title. Is bad faith enough to prevail ?

I'm also interested in the outcome.

 

[father_of_6]

Money laundering is illegal. Is Car title laundering also illegal ?
I'll guess that the car dealer had a pretty good idea that the title was laundered since it is reasonable to think that a car dealer would be conversant with title rules and know that a totaled car cannot have a clean title. Is bad faith enough to prevail ?

I'm also interested in the outcome.

It seems like they did disclose it though. Was there some recourse for the dealership? Could they have reconciled the title with the vehicle history?

 

[Rocky_H]

AFAIK, if you can not Supercharge, that means all DC Fast charging is disabled.

That has been inconsistent over the years, and there are instances on both sides, but the majority of cases are the opposite of that. Most cars that are salvaged get Supercharging access removed, but CHAdeMO or other DC fast charging does still work. My theory is that is what the normal policy or intention is, but there have been several cases where Tesla employees didn't know how to make that configuration charge properly and accidentally turned off all DC charging.

 

[rrolsbe]

That has been inconsistent over the years, and there are instances on both sides, but the majority of cases are the opposite of that. Most cars that are salvaged get Supercharging access removed, but CHAdeMO or other DC fast charging does still work. My theory is that is what the normal policy or intention is, but there have been several cases where Tesla employees didn't know how to make that configuration charge properly and accidentally turned off all DC charging.

Hope you are correct and thanks for your post. From Tesla's point of view, turning off all DC charging from an ultimate legal liability perspective might make sense. ie.. Tesla vehicle has a mishap at an Electrify America location and they somehow determine Tesla disabled the same car from charging at a Supercharger. Bottom line **** can happen anytime ANY electric car is DC fast charging and Tesla might be being overlay black or white on this issue.

 

[Rocky_H]

From Tesla's point of view, turning off all DC charging from an ultimate legal liability perspective might make sense.

It probably would, and I'm sure it is what they would like to do, but there is a VERY big distinction there about what they would be legally ALLOWED to do. Not letting people have access anymore to their privately run charging network? Sure--easy. Removing an actual feature from the car itself that they no longer own? No, they are probably not allowed to do that.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Imagine if you bought a repaired ICE vehicle that was declared totaled and weren't allowed to get gas at a station. This whole banned from Supercharging thing because a Tesla was totaled is a bit much. Not sure why Tesla is worried about liability when anyone can sue for whatever they want, even with disclaimers. I'd think Tesla would be more worried about FSD beta drivers killing someone because they didn't pay attention and then suing Tesla, than worry about liability with a totaled car that was repaired.

It's not necessarily the directly liability, it's the bad PR if a fire happens at a supercharger station while a Tesla is charging there. You can always charge at home, so the gas station analogy isn't quite apt. Also for Model 3/Y it appears third party DC remains active even if supercharging is disabled (for S/X it appears to disable all DC charging).

 

[Resist]

It's not necessarily the directly liability, it's the bad PR if a fire happens at a supercharger station while a Tesla is charging there. You can always charge at home, so the gas station analogy isn't quite apt. Also for Model 3/Y it appears third party DC remains active even if supercharging is disabled (for S/X it appears to disable all DC charging).

The problem is you can't always charge at home if you are on a trip, not can you?

 

[PianoAl]

I wouldn't want a Tesla that can't use the SuperChargers, but I think it worth mentioning that you can still use third-party chargers, and obviously home charging.

Right. We're buying a second Tesla for when my wife and I both need a car. That second car will never go on trips and probably never need to supercharge.

If OP has a similar situation, the car could work for him, but I'd expect to pay much less for car that can't supercharge ($25K?).

 

[Rocky_H]

Also for Model 3/Y it appears third party DC remains active even if supercharging is disabled (for S/X it appears to disable all DC charging).

There never was a distinction based on the model types (unless Tesla's internal configuration change tools were just easier to understand and use on one type maybe?). Most of the S and X ALSO kept DC charging active. The majority of those I've seen through the years could still CHAdeMO charge. It seemed to be only a very rare few that got all DC charging disabled. And considering that's what most people here would say is fully illegal for Tesla to do, makes me think it was accidental.

 

[derotam]

If you purchased this car on Ebay, you should be covered by the Vehicle Purchase Protection:
Vehicle Purchase Protection (VPP) provides protection, against certain losses associated with fraud, up to a maximum amount of your purchase price paid (not exceeding $100,000) for purchase of an eligible vehicle on ebay.com or through the eBay mobile application. The types of fraud that are generally covered are:

• non-delivery of the vehicle,
• undisclosed defects in the title, and certain undisclosed defects with the vehicle. VPP is automatically included at no additional cost when you complete the purchase of an eligible vehicle on ebay.com or eBay mobile applications.

So after reading this whole thread it looks like this might really be the only possible avenue for any kind of claim... Personally, the lack of supercharging to me could possibly fall under the "certain undisclosed defects with the vehicle". Obviously it all depends on what "certain" contains.

As far as the salvage title/total loss, the "dealer" at least partially disclosed an issue with the title. Lots of research could possibly uncover some kind of fraud with someone, depending on the differing state laws at play here...for example some states require the insurance company that totaled the vehicle to apply for a salvage title.

I think without getting a lawyer involved you can possibly try out the ebay protection. Also as others have mentioned, selling the vehicle could turn into a nightmare and again, you might want to talk to a lawyer concerning your liability.

 

[mtmra70]

oof, that eBay posting is ROUGH.

Anyone using "B4" in a professional manner should not be trusted...lol