Photo: TESBROS via YouTube | Edited
Tesla Model S owners have complained about door-handle problems in early models, and some disgruntled owners have filed a class-action lawsuit over this issue. Now Tesla wants the case dismissed, not because the door handles had no problem but because of obscure legal technicalities.
We've all seen movies about how smart-a** lawyers bend laws and reality to prove the other side was not wearing the right hat when wrongdoing happened. I can only think of "Better call Saul," but there are surely many of them. And Saul Goodman would've been the perfect lawyer for Tesla had Elon Musk not found even better lawyers in real life. At least, that's how it seems after watching Tesla's latest legal adventures, especially the one regarding FSD promises. Tesla's lawyers argued that these promises were not fraud but a "mere failure."
There's another interesting case like that one, and Tesla wants it dismissed over a similarly bizarre claim. We're talking about a class action lawsuit over the defective motorized door handles in the 2014-2016 Tesla Model S. The EV maker wants the case dismissed because it was not a manufacturing defect covered by the warranty but a design defect, which was not covered. Although Tesla admits the door handles had a problem, it doesn't accept responsibility for it, invoking legal technicalities.
The 2014-2016 Tesla Model S had motorized door handles built to retract when unused. Each door handle is flush with the car's body until the driver approaches, causing the door handle to "present itself" so the door can be opened. According to the lawsuit, plaintiff John Urban, who owns a 2015 Tesla Model S P85D, alleges he specifically bought his car because of the retractable door handle tech. The rear door handle stopped working while the vehicle was still under warranty and was repaired for free.
The other door handles broke one by one after the car's warranty expired, and Urban had to pay to replace them. The plaintiff tried convincing Tesla to pay for the repairs but was unsuccessful. Urban's class action lawsuit alleges that Tesla replaced the door handles with the same defective type. Because the door handles malfunction, occupants cannot enter and exit the cars through the affected doors, which can prove dangerous in emergencies. Post 2016, Tesla changed the door handle mechanism, tacitly admitting the previous design was flawed.
While Tesla doesn't argue about the door handle problem, it wants the lawsuit dismissed because the plaintiff does not have standing to sue. First, because he is a Florida resident, which allegedly means he lacks standing to assert claims under California law. Second, the claims should also be dismissed because the laws of a single state do not stretch to cover a nationwide putative class.
There's another interesting case like that one, and Tesla wants it dismissed over a similarly bizarre claim. We're talking about a class action lawsuit over the defective motorized door handles in the 2014-2016 Tesla Model S. The EV maker wants the case dismissed because it was not a manufacturing defect covered by the warranty but a design defect, which was not covered. Although Tesla admits the door handles had a problem, it doesn't accept responsibility for it, invoking legal technicalities.
The 2014-2016 Tesla Model S had motorized door handles built to retract when unused. Each door handle is flush with the car's body until the driver approaches, causing the door handle to "present itself" so the door can be opened. According to the lawsuit, plaintiff John Urban, who owns a 2015 Tesla Model S P85D, alleges he specifically bought his car because of the retractable door handle tech. The rear door handle stopped working while the vehicle was still under warranty and was repaired for free.
The other door handles broke one by one after the car's warranty expired, and Urban had to pay to replace them. The plaintiff tried convincing Tesla to pay for the repairs but was unsuccessful. Urban's class action lawsuit alleges that Tesla replaced the door handles with the same defective type. Because the door handles malfunction, occupants cannot enter and exit the cars through the affected doors, which can prove dangerous in emergencies. Post 2016, Tesla changed the door handle mechanism, tacitly admitting the previous design was flawed.
While Tesla doesn't argue about the door handle problem, it wants the lawsuit dismissed because the plaintiff does not have standing to sue. First, because he is a Florida resident, which allegedly means he lacks standing to assert claims under California law. Second, the claims should also be dismissed because the laws of a single state do not stretch to cover a nationwide putative class.
Google News