Tesla Lied To Customers, Blaming Them For Shoddy Parts The Company Knew Were Defective
from the giant-bullshit-machine dept
Back in July, Reuters released a bombshell report showing that not only has Tesla aggressively lied about its EV ranges for the better part of the last decade, it created teams whose entire purpose was to lie to customers about it when they called up to complain. The story lasted all of two days in the news cycle before it was supplanted by clickbait stories about a billionaire fist fight that never actually happened.
Now Reuters is back again, with another major story showcasing how for much of that same decade, Tesla routinely blamed customers for the failure of substandard parts the company knew to be defective. The outlet reviewed thousands of Tesla documents and found a pattern where customers would complain about dangerously broken and low-quality parts, only to be repeatedly gaslit by the company:
“Wheels falling off cars at speed. Suspensions collapsing on brand-new vehicles. Axles breaking under acceleration. Tens of thousands of customers told Tesla about a host of part failures on low-mileage cars. The automaker sought to blame drivers for vehicle ‘abuse,’ but Tesla documents show it had tracked the chronic ‘flaws’ and ‘failures’ for years.”
The records show a repeated pattern across tens of thousands of customers where parts would fail, then the customer would be accused of “abusing” their vehicle. They also show that Tesla meticulously tracked part failures, knew many parts were defective, and routinely not only lied to regulators about it, but charged customers to repair parts they knew had high failure rates and were systemically prone to failure:
“Yet the company has denied some of the suspension and steering problems in statements to U.S. regulators and the public– and, according to Tesla records, sought to shift some of the resulting repair costs to customers.”
This is obviously a very different narrative than the one Musk presented last month at that unhinged New York Times DealBook event:
“We make the best cars. Whether you hate me, like me or are indifferent, do you want the best car, or do you not want the best car?”
They are, as it turns out, not the best cars.
And this is before you even touch on the growing pile of corpses caused by the company’s half-cooked and repeatedly misrepresented “full self driving” technology, which last week resulted in the recall of nearly every vehicle that has it. That problem was, as reports have documented in detail, thanks in part to non-engineer Musk over-ruling his actual engineers when it comes to only using cameras.
This comes as a new study shows that Tesla vehicles have the highest accident rate of any brand on the road. As usual, U.S. regulators have generally been asleep or lethargic during most of this, worried that enforcing basic public safety standards would somehow be stifling “innovation.”
The deaths from “full self driving” have been going on for the better part of the last decade, yet the NHTSA only just apparently figured out where its pants were located. But a lot of the problems Reuters have revealed should be slam dunk cases for the FTC under the “unfair and deceptive” component of the FTC Act, creating what will likely be a very busy 2024 for Elon Musk.
A lot of this stuff has been discussed by Tesla critics for years. It’s only once Musk began his downward descent into full racist caricature and undeniable self-immolation that press outlets with actual resources started to meaningfully dig beyond the hype. There’s cause for some significant U.S. journalism introspection as to why that is that probably will never happen.
Meanwhile, for a supposed innovation super-genius, most Musk companies have the kind of customer service that makes Comcast seem empathic and competent.
There’s no shortage of nightmare stories about Tesla Solar customer service. And we’ve well documented how Starlink can’t even respond to basic email inquiries by users tired of being on year-long waiting lists and seeking refunds. And once you burn past the novelty, gimmicks, and fanboy denialism, Tesla automotive clearly isn’t any better.
That said, this goes well beyond just bad customer service. The original Reuters story from July about the company lying about EV ranges clearly demonstrates not just bad customer service, but profound corporate culture rot:
“Inside the Nevada team’s office, some employees celebrated canceling service appointments by putting their phones on mute and striking a metal xylophone, triggering applause from coworkers who sometimes stood on desks. The team often closed hundreds of cases a week and staffers were tracked on their average number of diverted appointments per day.”
As with much of what Musk does, a large share of what the press initially sold the public as unbridled innovation was really just cutting corners. It’s easy to accomplish more than the next guy when you refuse to invest in customer service, don’t care about labor or environmental laws, don’t care about public safety, don’t care about the customer, and have zero compulsion about lying to regulators or making things up at every conceivable opportunity.
Filed Under: automotive, cars, consumer rights, ev, mechanics, repairs, safety, tesla
Companies: tesla


Comments on “Tesla Lied To Customers, Blaming Them For Shoddy Parts The Company Knew Were Defective”
Wow, he really is trying to be another Trump. What sucks for him is that he doesn’t have nearly the kind of charisma as that orange sack of shit.
Re:
Not only that but our laws say he is not allowed to be da prez – thankfully.
Re: Re:
Just wait for the Colorado ruling on Trump to hit the Supreme Court. Soon the Republicans are gonna say they can elect whoever they want, rules be dammed.
Re: Re: Re:
idk, the SCOTUS already suffers PR damage from their prior transgressions of the law. Some have even said it is illegitimate.
Re: Re: Re:2
As far as I’m concerned any 5-4 ruling with Clarence Thomas in the majority is suspect of corruption and bribery. In the future there should be no hesitation to revisit these.
Re: Re:
Doesn’t stop him from running in South Africa.
I’m sure the connections he built up will be of use to the South Africans…
Re:
On the other hand, he’s been a lot more successful at business than Trump has. I don’t have a lot of love for Tesla or SpaceX but both of them made significant changes to their respective industries.
I think Musk’s continuing erratic behavior and very public bigotry are going to make it hard for him to achieve the same success going forward. But he’s going to continue to be an important and influential person for some time to come.
And he certainly hasn’t had any trouble attracting his own cult of weirdos who defend everything he says and does.
Re: Re:
20-30 years ago, you’d say trump was an extremely successful businesman. he was referenced in movies for it (home alone 2, 2 weeks notice), he had 3 casinos in Atlantic city etc. It was a house of cards, businesses propping up each other. Much like how a lot of Musk’s companies are.
Did they though, I mean, REALLY?
I know my electric cars and control systems. Musk jumped in on Tesla, who were starting right as a whole new technology became available to the market – high capacity+discharge lithium batteries. All the companies that had been doing the innovation and research funding for motors and controllers etc. then had to do a major pivot, and abandon a lot of their established work/internal infrastructure to make that switch, which takes a while. Especially while trying to keep existing product lines going and keep profitability.
As for SpaceX, most of their stuff was off-the-shelf, developed by taxpayers. but again, because it was a small, unaccuountable company, they didn’t have shareholders who needed the constant profitability. As one NASA project manager said, the main difference is SpaceX could blow up 3 rockets on the pad no problem, if NASA blew up one that’s a 2 year hold on anything and everything for public enquiries.
Their only real innovation was ‘be new, so you don’t have inertia, and don’t give a shit about anyone else’.
actual innovation, actual changes, they’ve made very little, except to push things to a race to the bottom.
Re: Re: Re:
If you’re going to make up a fake citation, you should probably choose a more plausible one than past-me. I know that guy; I can check with him.
Re: Re:
I think the changes Musk had to the industries isn’t built on anything but bullshitting his way to success by convincing investors to tolerate enormous losses for extended periods of time. This has allowed a few of his business to succeed, so far, where other existing businesses would be lynched by their shareholder. He’s also had a bunch of other bad ideas and business that are clearly zombies as this point.
The first Tesla Roadster was a body built by Lotus, AC Propulsion’s drive-train, and Panasonic Batteries all put together. Which isn’t nothing, but it’s not revolutionary it’s evolutionary. And yes, they are making money with a sky high valuation now, but they are clearly playing games to get there. Further the continual embarrassment of the indefinitely postponed FSD vaporware, apparently shitty reliability, price reductions, insurance costs, irrational company goals, warranty shenanigans, movement by the incumbents, and incredibly delayed launches of products have to be taking their toll on the company. However, they seem to maintain a P/E ratio well beyond absurd, so what do I know? I’m willing to call Tesla a success at this point as it seems to be able to sustain profits, but I also think they are in a pretty precarious position in that any one of their current problems could end the company.
As for Space X, this is where I would acknowledge more technical innovation. It’s also important to realization that 20 years before Space X achieved vertical landing with a reusable rocket, McDonnell Douglass demonstrated this was possible with the DC-X/DC-XA rockets. But I can be fair and give him credit for having the vision, and willingness to take the risk by putting up 90 Million in real cash to start the company, hire the right people, etc. Which honestly isn’t even as impressive as his ability to go out and get investor dollars while simultaneously providing the room for the failures of exploding rockets. But, as best I can tell, has made a profit for exactly one quarter of 55 million dollars on 1.5 billion in revenue.
Re: Re: Re:
These are reasonable criticisms, but it also gets at the difference between invention and innovation. That is, the difference between being first and actually getting it to a place where it is useable/desirable by the market. And Elon deserves credit for making that happen with both Tesla and SpaceX.
Re: Re:
Better at business is still to be seen.
Elon is sitting on a house of cards. Tesla’s big profits? not from increased car sales. And the market isn’t looking to continue rapid expansion. SpaceX? Anticipated space launches to grow to >$5 billion by 2022. Actual launch market remained steady around $3 Billion, with SpaceX only getting <$2 Billion based on number of launches and publicly stated prices (factoring out unprofitable starlink launches). He’s burning investor cash because Starship is consuming more than SpaceX’s annual revenue.
If he can keep plates spinning and keep retail ‘investors’ on the hook for a few more decades, sure. If He can bring these companies to genuine profitability, sure. But if he proves the haters right and has been running an investor ponzi scheme so he could step on every known issue rake leading to failure, I think Trump spinning plates for 50 years before the crimes caught up was a better buisness play.
Incredible
Help me understand why this company is still allowed to sell cars. I’ve worked for an automaker for 20 years – mostly in the quality department. Any security issue was taken very seriously.
Re:
NHTSA have labelled most Tesla cars with 5-stars ratings, it’s safe to say theses cars are “safe”, at least for dummies during crashtests. Now there a lot of different factors to take in account to declare a driving as safe, even before crashing the car to check that airbags work correctly.
The “self-driving” surely gives false feelings of safety (they know how to fake it, before, hypothetically in the next decade, make it), and the good acceleration of EV cars may encouraged drivers to rely more on automatic detectors to prevent accidents on dense urban zones. Added the marketing that a $30k car sold like the ultimate high-tech supercar, the typical driver is relatively young (< 40y) and not very experienced since the EV range won’t allow much use of the car on long trips. That also exclude most of families to fit in, and reserve it to single male drivers fantasizing to be playing Cyberpunk.
Now, only a manufacturer knows _exactly what quality is on board (leading to Dieselgate, etc.) and rely mostly on outfitters for guaranties. Also outside (mostly some part) of the US, Tesla have only a very small market (generally in EU, as much a Volvo), nothing to compare at all with Volkswagen (this includes BMW and Mini) or Toyota, the brand is much regarded as exotic, and only the stock-market can lift an eye-brown.
Re: Re:
Its capabilities put in the worse place for safety in that it good enough to drive when everything fits its model, but not good enough to function without an attentive driver as a backstop for its decisions. It is not as if danger announces itself with load noises to attract the driver attention, at least not before those loud noise mean it is too late to react.
Aircraft use all sorts of warning sound to attract the attention of the pilot(s), who are supposed to be monitoring everything even when using the autopilot.
Re:
Broadly, other auto manufacturers are concerned with future liability. Musk is not. This attitude allows him to act without care for quality unlike others.
As for why the government doesn’t stop him, its a combination of 3 factors:
The media. as noted in the article:
This misleading coverage got him in good with progressives. Things such as the (fake) solar roof tiles presented him as environmentally conscious, and thats very rare for conservatives. That image has remained active in the larger public who aren’t bothered by the internet drama Musk stirred up. That has allowed many progressives to dismiss criticism of Musk without critically assessing the complaints (“hes saving the world, why are you opposed to that”). His conservative turn has simultaneously allowed conservatives to embrace him despite his image and the image of electric cars as ‘woke’. This has given him a level of teflon to his reputation that only recently cracked.
Capitalism. Musk has money. He’s built an entire genius tony stark image and he supports conservative economic policy. This gives him influence over the politicians and regulators who would control him, and his conservative influence has encouraged conservative politicians to protect Musk from regulators (outside the SEC, but thats a more complicated rats nest thats really a distraction from this discussion). Of course that brings us to the real issues holding musk accountable:
SpaceX and Starlink. Starlink as low value as it is to bridging the digital divide and with its limited user capacity, is super valuable to militaries. The US military immediately adopted it and Military officals consider it indespensible.
SpaceX Engineers have created a much more viable lift system, and only violated several aspects of their original Boca Chica launch license to do it. but those savings mean industry and the US government need SpaceX to achieve their goals of greater utilization of space.
The strict property rights Musk has embraced as part of his conservative turn protect his ownership, and any attempt to halt sales of Tesla without the clear evidence to convince a court results in rich investor uproar and risk Musk retaliating in a fit of pique. The gears of justice are slow, and are even slower for someone who is rich.
Government corruption
Welcome to the New US of A, where the government is in the pockets of a group of billionaires and their cronies. Any big enough crook qualifies.
Re:
New?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Just another anti-Musk hit piece.
Surprised that it was delegated to Bode, however.
Re:
Please you pedo, nazi defending piece of shit, post what is actually wrong in the article.
Re: Really?
The reason for so many “hit piece[s]” is that Musk and his companies continue to do things that are relevant to a tech policy news blog like Techdirt, and they are disproportionately bad things. If you don’t want another “hit piece,” you need to somehow convince Musk to stop.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
This entire paragraph is libelous:
Just another anti-Musk hit piece.
Re: Re: Re:
You have no clue what libel actually is. Unsurprising.
Re: Re: Re:
Maybe pedoman should do the opposite of those things then?
Their customer service has repeatedly been shown to be horrible.
They have broken labor law numerous times in more than one country and treat their employees horribly.
Dumped waste product into a river.
No one who cares about public safety beta tests on the public, repeatedly puts in features that are dangerous, or hides safety and testing data from the public.
He’s lied multiple times over the years both to people and customers.
Re: Re: Re:
there is video evidence of him doing all those things tho. So how would it be libel?
Asking as if I’m the exact demographic that fanbois over Musk and Trump, wouldn’t it only be libelous if the accusations were false?
Re: Re: Re:
And I’m very sure Thomson Reuters’ reporting is defamatory.
(It isn’t, for those of you in the audience playing at home).
Re: Re: Re:
Prove it.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
I don’t clap like a trained seal for anyone, Stone, least of all a mentally-ill porn addict like you.
Re: Re: Re:3
The Plaintiff argues that a given paragraph in the article is libelous. But the Plaintiff offers no facts in their Complaint to support this proposition. The Plaintiff’s failure to cite the substance of their claims, as is required for those claims to be taken seriously, compels dismissal.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
The thing that keeps me from really sticking the knife in is how pathetic you are, Stone. You’re not a lawyer, and it’s sad to see you blabbering as if you were one. I genuinely hope you get the help you need, but I know the prognosis is grim since there’s no cure for what’s wrong with you 🙁
Re: Re: Re:5
Make big claims and when getting called on it all you can do is deflect by attacking people. That is truly pathetic and there is no need to “stick the knife in” how pathetic you are because you have accomplished that all by yourself.
Re: Re: Re:5
So you admit you’re nothing more than a mentally ill pathological liar projecting yourself onto Stephen.
Re: Re: Re:5
He’s using a quote from a court opinion to make his point, similar to how people meme on Wikipedia’s “[citation needed]” tag.
If you can’t be bothered to provide evidence to support your claim, no one has any reason to take you or your claim seriously.
Re: Re: Re:3
ok jhon
Re: Re: Re:3
Thank you for proving that you use words without knowing(or caring about) their meaning.
Re: Re: Re:3
And no one’s supposed to take you seriously, or even notice your arguments if you can’t even play by the defined rules of debate.
Which is to say, get the fuck out.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
Yet you retards reply even to my worst, most lazy comments.
Re: Re: Re:5
And I’ll bet your hand is covered in blisters and your dick (most likely a tiny one)has burns all over it from all the friction as you excitedly read all the replies.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
Why so much hate in your heart, friend?
Re: Re: Re:5
“A: bigoted statement
B: What the fuck?
C: Now, now, let’s be civil.
Dear C (ed: that’s you): You came in one comment too late.”
-John Scalzi
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:6
Who is “John Scalzi” and what does he have to do with this discussion? Just curious.
Re: Re: Re:7
Learn to use Google, dear.
Re: Re: Re:5
You are free to justify not playing by the rules of debate. Yes, that includes using bigotry to do so.
And I am free to react appropriately.
And since you chose not to debate but to call people bigoted names…
Don’t like it? Start proving your claims, fuckface.
Re: Re: Re:
Why do you hate the First Amendment?
Re: Re: Re:
As an owner of a 2016 Model-X, I can tell you it’s all true. My wheel fell off while backing out of the driveway and the “customer service” tried to tell me I ran into something.
All the service people really know how to do is plug into the computer and ask it what’s wrong. If the computer doesn’t know, they say everything is okay. I just must have been imagining the message saying there were charging problems.
It show how much Elmo really cares about quality when the computer can display a message to the user, but for some reason can’t spit it out the diagnostic port.
Re: Re: Re:2
Teslas, and other EVs, don’t have diagnostic ports generally. The OBD-2 diagnostic port requirement was tied to Emissions standards. EVs weren’t required to carry them. That allowed them to put all the diagnostic data into the proprietary telemetry stream that you can’t access. Tesla knows what’s wrong, they explicitly don’t want you to know.
CS agents simply are trained to lie to you to save tesla money on its bad builds.
Re: Re: Re:
I see the weird nerds meme is still relevant.
The wheels on a Tesla go round and round as you sit in the middle of the street and watch them go round and round down the road.
I would never buy an EV.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
Exactly. Fossil fuels FTW. Why would you buy an overpriced, under-ranged EV when internal combustion engines are at peak development and reliability?
Re:
EVs as a concept could be good, what you want to avoid is any EVs that Elon’s been involved with.
And this bs might get the government to ask serious questions about how Tesla operates….
Mind you the multiple semis they cars have broadsided weren’t enough to get immediate action but this time…
Tesla Customer Service Manual: First, gaslight the customer...
A handful of your cars have hardware failures? A handful of your cars had mistakes in production or the customer might have done something.
Your cars regularly suffer from hardware failures? That’s not on the customers, the problem is on your end.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Let’s be clear: noted Nazi-cocksucker Elon Musk is a retard who understands NOTHING about science or engineering – he bought his degrees with daddy’s money. Tesla is a fraud and has always been a fraud; its only use is that it helps identify the assholes and morons publicly so that we can all bully them.
Re:
Please try to avoid ablest slurs when talking about that jackass(or in general really), they already have a hard enough time without being lumped in with him.