-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I agree. I really don't think having such a convoluted and ambiguous mess of an ESA transfer process helps Tesla. They will end up wasting valuable resources dealing with justifiably frustrated buyers and sellers who simply want the benefit of an ESA Extended Warranty that has already been bought for $4,000.
They need to have a process where the inspections and validations are done prior to the actual sale, the ESA transfer is approved pending the execution of the sale, and then allow 30 days for the sale to be concluded. Any other way does not make sense.
It's right in the first item:
"You may transfer this Vehicle ESA to a different private owner of the same Vehicle or, based upon the calculation specified in Section J(2)(a) through (c) below, as a credit applied to the purchase of a new Vehicle ESA for a new or Certified Pre-Owned (CPO) Tesla vehicle purchased by You, provided that you contact Tesla prior to any such transfer or purchase and submit the following:"
It's still a mess, though. Tesla needs to allow owners to get a pre-approval for the ESA transfer.
Read the rest of it though. They are asking you to submit an actual document evidencing change of ownership and the mileage on the date the car was sold and somehow you are supposed to submit this before the sale is finalized without knowing if the warranty transfer will be honored?
Hence the chicken and the egg analogy and how Tesla is asking for both the chicken and the egg when you barely have an egg.
They are not asking you to submit this before the vehicle is sold but before the transfer is made when the transfer is what you are trying to validate so you can have a sale. Any verifications of the validity of the ESA transfer needs to be done before the car is actually sold. Not after the car is sold when you can't even undo the transaction easily if sales taxes are already paid. I know I've said this before but pointing it out again since you posted.
The transfer process is basically a boondoggle of a mess and not practical because neither the buyer nor the seller would know if the transfer will be honored until the sale is finalized. Selling or buying a car with the warranty intact shouldn't turn into an episode of Wheel of Fortune :crying:
Last edited:
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
The way it is written is a bit of a mess, but at the same time it doesn't explicitly say that the inspection can't happen before the sale or submission of paperwork. So presumably you can do the inspection first.
Hence the chicken and the egg analogy and how Tesla is asking for both the chicken and the egg when you barely have an egg.
Read the rest of it though. They are asking you to submit an actual document evidencing change of ownership and the mileage on the date the car was sold and somehow you are supposed to submit this before the sale is finalized without knowing if the warranty transfer will be honored?
They are not asking you to submit this before the vehicle is sold but before the transfer is made when the transfer is what you are trying to validate so you can have a sale. Any verifications of the validity of the ESA transfer needs to be done before the car is actually sold. Not after the car is sold when you can't even undo the transaction easily if sales taxes are already paid. I know I've said this before but pointing it out again since you posted.
The transfer process is basically a boondoggle of a mess and not practical because neither the buyer nor the seller would know if the transfer will be honored until the sale is finalized. Selling or buying a car with the warranty intact shouldn't turn into an episode of Wheel of Fortune :crying:
Looks like it was written by two different attorneys who didn't read what the other wrote.
Gizmotoy
Active Member
Policy was reversed. The new language requires inspection of the vehicle to complete the transfer, and the logistics of doing that when selling to an independent buyer is what's being discussed above. The language is now clear that transfers are permitted, but it's a bit less clear how you can guarantee the transfer is successful for your buyer when completing your sale.
IMHO the reason this is a long thread is because the core matter remains unresolved and the policy reversal is only as good as it is practical and at the moment it is not practical.
What many wanted was a fair, straightforward and practical ESA warranty transfer process to preserve the investment of owners who bought an ESA for peace of mind and maintain the resale value of their vehicle when they sell. This would also benefit those who would like to purchase a private party Tesla with an ESA Extended Warranty.
What they've done is say yes the ESA is transferrable but you need to follow a borderline impossible and unpractical procedure for transferring an ESA warranty that's not much better.
If you want to close this thread I understand but I hope it would be okay if then a thread is created about the ESA Extended Warranty transfer process being pretty much impossible and unpractical to follow, because it is. I hope you would consider keeping this thread open as many feel this issue really is unresolved and this thread contains many arguments that should not need to be rehashed.
They are essentially asking you to send them an already executed document evidencing change of ownership and the mileage on the date the car was sold before they will validate and approve the transfer of the ESA. Except how can a Tesla owner receive the benefit of the ESA that they have paid $4,000 for unless they can covey to someone looking to buy the car that the ESA that was bought and paid for is valid.
I feel this issue is unresolved until we have a transfer process that is fair, reasonable, and practical. This would actually help Tesla in the long run so they don't end up in messy situations with irate buyers and sellers who find themselves involved with the sale of a car and after the fact find out the ESA that was paid for would not transfer for whatever process. Why not just make it clear and fair from the beginning?
I really don't understand why there has to be any validations and inspections. Does any other company do this? If so, why?
Scenario:
I have a car with an ESA.
I transfer the car and ESA to my son.
What suddenly happened that requires an inspection and validation to determine whether or not Tesla with deign to have the ESA transferable?
If the car wasn't maintained when I had it and I went to get service the ESA may deny the claim (if that is a term of the agreement). Okay. That's fair.
But...
If the car wasn't maintained when I had it and it is transferred to my son and HE goes to get service the ESA may deny the claim. Okay. That's fair.
Besides discouraging the transfer of an ESA, is there any valid reason to do this? And if so, are other car companies so stupid that they don't do this same practice? What are they missing?
Okay...so here is why they may be doing this (added dramatic element!)
Owner: Here is a car that has an ESA, so you are covered for a long time, isn't life wonderful?
Buyer: Take my money!
....time passes...
Buyer: Hi Tesla, my car has a bunch of issues, here is my ESA please fix everything.
Tesla: Uhhh....this car never had any service, was obviously raced, was an Uber car (or other number of issues that may invalidate an ESA), no ESA for you!
Buyer: Tesla, you are a meany! I don't like Tesla.
Tesla: Oh, if only we did an inspection and validation after you bought the car we could have told you this then you could have....uh...could have....uh, I guess you couldn't have done anything except ask for your money back?
Last edited:
You say that as if it was a change. The old/original language had the inspection clause included as well. And it I don't think it is required, as the same language existed before and I don't think people that transferred ESAs ever reported that they had to get an inspection. (But Tesla can require that an inspection be done if they feel they need to.)
Gizmotoy
Active Member
Not really. Just summarizing the current status, and providing context for the current discussion.
The only thing I can think of is that if when you are selling your car you get $3k more for it because it has an ESA, but you didn't maintain the car so when the new buyer takes it in for repair they are denied, and blame Tesla because Tesla charged $100 to transfer something that they weren't going to honor. (So the buyer is out $3,100.)
Given that this is still rather confusing, I'm removing the "[Resolved]" from the thread title for the time being.
I added a wiki to the second post in case anyone wants to summarize the result: Extended Service Agreements NO LONGER TRANSFERABLE
As an aside, is the ESA available in all states yet? IRRC there were some states in which Tesla couldn't offer an ESA.
I added a wiki to the second post in case anyone wants to summarize the result: Extended Service Agreements NO LONGER TRANSFERABLE
As an aside, is the ESA available in all states yet? IRRC there were some states in which Tesla couldn't offer an ESA.
Cyclone
Cyclonic Member ((.oO))
Because, reading behind the lines, Tesla really doesn't want to offer the ESA. They are offering with worst terms they can get away with so they check off the box, but are doing pretty much everything they can to make it stink so you won't buy it.
The scenario you outlined isn't very far fetched and this is precisely what is wrong with the current policy. They've come up with an almost impossible transfer process that is neither transparent, nor logical or fair.
This process can't be good for Tesla either as it needlessly alienates owners and potential buyers new to the brand. When they go through the process of selling or buying a Tesla as they will discover how unreasonable this policy is where you essentially have to buy a car to find out if the ESA is valid or will transfer. And if it does not transfer it will be a huge mess for everyone, including Tesla.
By comparison, this is how you would transfer a BMW Extended Warranty. Basically you fill out a form that is barely one page, submit it, and you are done. See how straightforward this process could be?
The New Owner of the vehicle covered by the attached Contract hereby requests the transfer of this
BMW EXTENDED VEHICLE PROTECTION
REQUEST FOR TRANSFER OF COVERAGE.
Contract/Policy #:____________________________
Name of Current Contract Holder
(Person transferred from)
Address
City/State/Zip
Odometer Mileage at this date:______________
Name of New Owner
(Person transferred to)
Address
City/State/Zip
Contract from the current Contract Holder. The transfer fee is attached. (Make check or money order
payable to United Service Protection).
I (We) hereby certify that I (we) have received all necessary maintenance records, that with the odometer
mileage stated in this form is correct and agrees with the odometer statement, and that the manufacturer’s
warranty (if applicable) has been transferred to my name. I understand that I must enclose copies of
maintenance records and the odometer statement along with my check or money order and transfer
request.
I also understand that the transferred contract is non-cancelable and cannot be
transferred within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this transfer.
Attached to this request is the
original Contract.
Date of Request New Owner Signature Date
Current Owner’s Authorization
(notarized statement)
Sworn to this ____ day of __________________.
My service plan agreement and extended service agreement both state that they cannot be canceled by either party, but I can transfer them to the buyer. The contracts explicitly state that neither party can alter them without written approval of both parties. So if I want to stick to the original terms, I can. They legally have no choice in the matter. That's not to say the transfer terms aren't a bit onerous as previously mentioned.
If I do want to switch to the new terms, where they provide a refund based on a formula, then I assume they will be cooperative. However I notice that the new version of the service plan can be cancelled but not the extended service plan. Perhaps they're just in the middle of revising things, but that discrepancy seems odd.
If they want to offer the option of moving my service agreement over to a new Tesla, then I might consider upgrading to a P90D. Otherwise there's no way I'm trading my car until they open an Ottawa service location!
If I do want to switch to the new terms, where they provide a refund based on a formula, then I assume they will be cooperative. However I notice that the new version of the service plan can be cancelled but not the extended service plan. Perhaps they're just in the middle of revising things, but that discrepancy seems odd.
If they want to offer the option of moving my service agreement over to a new Tesla, then I might consider upgrading to a P90D. Otherwise there's no way I'm trading my car until they open an Ottawa service location!
Similar threads
