Tesla LOCKS customer's battery to 66% capacity after unrelated service. - Louis Rossmann

mat200

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Jan 17, 2017
Messages
10,476
Reaction score
15,382
Tesla remotely software locks a used Tesla car down to "60" from "90" reducing the battery after the customer came in for service ...




Tesla LOCKS customer's battery to 66% capacity after unrelated service. -
Louis Rossmann




1659229347888.png
 

qflyer

Pulling my weight
Joined
Oct 22, 2021
Messages
171
Reaction score
110
Location
USA
Tesla remotely software locks a used Tesla car down to "60" from "90" reducing the battery after the customer came in for service ...




Tesla LOCKS customer's battery to 66% capacity after unrelated service. -
Louis Rossmann




View attachment 135047
I once had a free trial subscription to HBO. It was supposed to last for two weeks. At the end of two weeks, it just kept going. I was never charged a penny. I had free HBO for almost a year, until one day, it just went out. I called my cable provider and they showed no record of me ever having a subscription, I had it due to a glitch, and the glitch was fixed. Now I had no HBO. How dare they fix their problem that resulted in me getting something I was never supposed to have in the first place?!?!? Since I had it for free for almost a year, obviously I am entitled to free HBO for life, damn it!
</sarcasm>

I swear the sense of entitlement some people have is ridiculous. But (unfortunately) in this case, whining about the issue on social media got the guy his free 90 kWh battery back.
 

mat200

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Jan 17, 2017
Messages
10,476
Reaction score
15,382
I once had a free trial subscription to HBO. It was supposed to last for two weeks. At the end of two weeks, it just kept going. I was never charged a penny. I had free HBO for almost a year, until one day, it just went out. I called my cable provider and they showed no record of me ever having a subscription, I had it due to a glitch, and the glitch was fixed. Now I had no HBO. How dare they fix their problem that resulted in me getting something I was never supposed to have in the first place?!?!? Since I had it for free for almost a year, obviously I am entitled to free HBO for life, damn it!
</sarcasm>

I swear the sense of entitlement some people have is ridiculous. But (unfortunately) in this case, whining about the issue on social media got the guy his free 90 kWh battery back.
Not at all the same case .. HBO is a monthly subscription .. not in any way the same as buying a car.

Also, This person bought a USED TESLA which was noted to have a "90" battery ...

Again, this is completely different than what you state...
 

qflyer

Pulling my weight
Joined
Oct 22, 2021
Messages
171
Reaction score
110
Location
USA
Not at all the same case .. HBO is a monthly subscription .. not in any way the same as buying a car.

Also, This person bought a USED TESLA which was noted to have a "90" battery ...

Again, this is completely different than what you state...
Tesla screwed up and inadvertently unlocked extra capacity for a previous owner. The car got passed on and was falsely advertised as a 90 instead of the 60 it truly was. At the very least, the seller should have told the buyer the car was 90 because of a previous service, but that the 90 wasn’t actually an option he had paid for. Tesla had every right to lock the additional capacity once they realized their error.

Was it a good business decision? Probably not, but they’re not the bad guys here, just like HBO had every right to shut down my service when they caught their mistake.

This story is nothing but clickbait.
 

bp2008

Staff member
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
11,840
Reaction score
11,950
Location
USA
Wow. Kind of blows my mind that anyone would implement a software lock on battery capacity in this manner. In a world where we're all supposed to be so concerned with efficiency and reducing waste. It shouldn't have been a surprise to me though.
 

SyconsciousAu

Getting comfortable
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
872
Reaction score
821
Tesla had every right to lock the additional capacity once they realized their error.
I disagree. In Australia we have 4WD's with factory option twin fuel tanks. (I assume you can get that in the US too) Would you consider it acceptable for the manufacturer to remove the second tank, years after they installed it, from the third owner?
 

David L

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
5,173
Reaction score
12,996
Location
USA
I disagree. In Australia we have 4WD's with factory option twin fuel tanks. (I assume you can get that in the US too) Would you consider it acceptable for the manufacturer to remove the second tank, years after they installed it, from the third owner?
I agree, making a third owner pay for a mistake Telsa made from a previous owner is definitely wrong. Plus it is Very possible Telsa did an upgrade on the vehicle as some unwritten agreement (trade off/issue) to please their customer, it happens all the time in the auto industry.

I really don't like they way car manufactures are pushing services now, something tells me they will be able to lock us out of our vehicles in the future...
 
Last edited:

David L

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
5,173
Reaction score
12,996
Location
USA
Looks like after demanding $4500 to untick a ticked option Tesla have now given the customer back the extra range, just sad that it took an online barrage of comments before doing so.
Well just think of it, if they lose just one customer sell because of this story they lost the $4500 plus some...
 

The Automation Guy

Getting comfortable
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
796
Reaction score
1,411
Location
USA
Unfortunately we don't have the whole story and so it is hard to pass judgement as to who should be held accountable.

It sounds like the original client never paid for and was not suppose to receive the "extra" range on the car and Tesla eventually found and corrected the error. If this is the case, Tesla is in the right and the current customer should be mad at the person they bought it from because they misrepresented the car when they sold it. It's the person that sold the car to the current owner that needs to be held accountable (good luck with that however). (Of course you can also argue that Tesla is being petty with the whole episode and they should just leave things the way they were, but they do have the right to correct an error and take back a feature that was never purchased)

However, if the original owner had paid for the extra range to be unlocked and now Tesla is trying to take that feature back, then Tesla is obviously wrong and should be held accountable.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Messages
10,897
Reaction score
25,754
Location
New Jersey
Either way, the idea that the manufacturer, Tesla in this case, can, at will, limit range and who knows what else without the knowledge or consent of the owner of a vehicle is not a very comforting thought. All this cloud connected, remotely controlled, stuff is for the birds and people without a brain. It's bad enough that when you go into a dealer for service they can fool with things, potentially features you paid for with the purchase of the vehicle. Now they're doing it remotely.
 
Last edited:

David L

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
5,173
Reaction score
12,996
Location
USA
Unfortunately we don't have the whole story and so it is hard to pass judgement as to who should be held accountable.

It sounds like the original client never paid for and was not suppose to receive the "extra" range on the car and Tesla eventually found and corrected the error. If this is the case, Tesla is in the right and the current customer should be mad at the person they bought it from because they misrepresented the car when they sold it. It's the person that sold the car to the current owner that needs to be held accountable (good luck with that however). (Of course you can also argue that Tesla is being petty with the whole episode and they should just leave things the way they were, but they do have the right to correct an error and take back a feature that was never purchased)

However, if the original owner had paid for the extra range to be unlocked and now Tesla is trying to take that feature back, then Tesla is obviously wrong and should be held accountable.
I would agree if the vehicle is under warranty and warranty work is being done but to take something off/back that was previously installed by mistake or not is still wrong in my opinion and the new owner should not be punished by the manufacturer for their mistake. Something tells me they just dumbed down the battery life via software, may be wrong though. Looks like our future will be full of this kind of stuff, you will really not be buying a vehicle, more like leasing it at their control.
 

setch

n3wb
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
10
Reaction score
16
Location
UK
I guess it is cheaper for the manufacturers to make all their model to the same spec and then control what you get via software. How long before the software is hacked and you can get the full spec at a back street garage for a fraction of the cost. Just never go to the manufacturer for a service and have remote access disconnected.
 

IAmATeaf

Known around here
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
2,205
Location
United Kingdom
I guess it is cheaper for the manufacturers to make all their model to the same spec and then control what you get via software. How long before the software is hacked and you can get the full spec at a back street garage for a fraction of the cost. Just never go to the manufacturer for a service and have remote access disconnected.
Apparently there are hacks that can be down to get the range back but the customer didn’t want the car modified in that way.
 

samplenhold

Known around here
Joined
Aug 8, 2018
Messages
5,185
Reaction score
16,609
Location
Spring, Texas
I guess it is cheaper for the manufacturers to make all their model to the same spec and then control what you get via software. How long before the software is hacked and you can get the full spec at a back street garage for a fraction of the cost. Just never go to the manufacturer for a service and have remote access disconnected.
Like jailbreaking a phone. When I lived in Lagos, there were tons of guys set up on the streets that would unlock phones for a pittance. Can see this happening for cars software options. Read a report about some car companies now having things like heated seats as a rental option.
 

IAmATeaf

Known around here
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
2,205
Location
United Kingdom
Like jailbreaking a phone. When I lived in Lagos, there were tons of guys set up on the streets that would unlock phones for a pittance. Can see this happening for cars software options. Read a report about some car companies now having things like heated seats as a rental option.
BMW wanted to charge a monthly fee to use Android Auto/Apple Car Play in their cars until there was an outcry on social media and they relented, still a chargeable option though. They were also talking about renting things like heated seats, adaptive cruise control etc.
 
Top