Making the rounds today on the Internet are reports of somewhat widespread issues with the Tesla Model S where the suspension can fail suddenly:
Our investigation began in earnest upon reading a thread titled “Suspension Problem on Model S” in the Tesla Motors Club forum. The original poster (OP) in that thread described the suspension in his 2013 Model S (with 70,000 miles) failing at relatively low speed, saying the “left front hub assembly separated from the upper control arm.” Images of the broken suspension components showed high levels of rust in the steel ball joint and the OP reported being told by Tesla service center employees that the “ball joint bolt was loose and caused the wear,” which was “not normal.” Because his Tesla was out of warranty, the repair was reportedly sent to Tesla management for consideration.
So far, that seems to not all that unusual as I have heard this sort of response from a car company before. But here’s what happened next:
According to a subsequent post by the OP, Tesla management refused to repair the broken suspension under warranty despite the “not normal” levels of wear reported by the service techs. Then, just days later, the OP reported that Tesla had offered to pay 50% of the $3,100 repair bill in exchange for his signature on a “Goodwill Agreement” which he subsequently posted here (a scan of the stock agreement can be found here). That agreement included the following passage:
The Goodwill is being provided to you without any admission of liability or wrongdoing or acceptance of any facts by Tesla, and shall not be treated as or considered evidence of Tesla’s liability with respect to any claim or incidents. You agree to keep confidential our provision of the Goodwill, the terms of this agreement and the incidents or claims leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. In accepting the Goodwill, you hereby release and discharge Tesla and related persons or entities from any and all claims or damages arising out of or in any way connected with any claims or incidents leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. You further agree that you will not commence, participate or voluntarily aid in any action at law or in equity or any legal proceeding against Tesla or related persons or entities based upon facts related to the claims or incidents leading to or related to this Goodwill. [Emphasis added]
This is not normal. In short, what Tesla was asking the person to do is give up his right to do things like report this to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Effectively covering up that this problem even exists. That’s very troubling, and likely not legal:
NHTSA spokesman Bryan Thomas said Thursday that the issue involves suspensions in the Model S, Tesla’s largest-selling vehicle. While not immediately disclosing the nature of the complaints, he says the agency is reaching out to Tesla owner and the company to gain more information about the problem.
At the same time, Thomas said Tesla has a “troublesome nondisclosure agreement” that implies customers should not report safety issues.
“The agency immediately informed Tesla that any language implying that consumers should not contact the agency regarding safety concerns is unacceptable, and NHTSA expects Tesla to eliminate any such language,” he said in a statement.
NHTSA says it waas told by company officials that they did not intend to dissaude customers from contacting the government about safety concerns.
That begs the question: Is Tesla trying to cover up this issue? Now the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is apparently investigating this issue, and Tesla apparently isn’t talking about this with the exception of putting out a Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) in March of 2015, which indicates that a “known non-safety-related condition” applied to the front lower control arm of the Tesla Model S. But the optics of this really suck given this fact:
Until NHTSA publicizes the findings of its investigation, the sheer scope of Tesla’s apparent suspension defect won’t be clear. But other reports of suspension breakage are not hard to find, both in the “Suspension Problem on Model S” thread at TMC, elsewhere on that forum or around the internet. A gallery of photos apparently assembled by the hard-working Cassandra in this story shows a disturbing number of wrecked vehicles with broken suspensions. But these photos, like the two reports of Teslas driving off cliffs and other reports of inexplicable crashes, are circumstantial evidence at best. Until experienced investigators perform forensic analyses that can confirm whether suspension failure occurred before any of these crashes, these examples serve only to show the worst case scenario for Tesla.
Clearly Tesla has a major PR problem (at the very least) on it’s hands. What’s worse is that the way this was handled really paints the company in a negative light. Proving the fact that the cover up is often worse than the crime as shown with incidents like Watergate and Iran/Contra.
UPDATE: Let the PR war begin. This post is on the Tesla blog. Among other things, it say this:
Finally, it is worth noting that the blogger who fabricated this issue, which then caused negative and incorrect news to be written about Tesla by reputable institutions, is Edward Niedermayer. This is the same gentle soul who previously wrote a blog titled “Tesla Death Watch,” which starting on May 19, 2008 was counting the days until Tesla’s death. It has now been 2,944 days. We just checked our pulse and, much to his chagrin, appear to be alive. It is probably wise to take Mr. Niedermayer’s words with at least a small grain of salt.
We don’t know if Mr. Niedermayer’s motivation is simply to set a world record for axe-grinding or whether he or his associates have something financial to gain by negatively affecting Tesla’s stock price, but it is important to highlight that there are several billion dollars in short sale bets against Tesla. This means that there is a strong financial incentive to greatly amplify minor issues and to create false issues from whole cloth.
It seems that besides trying to refute the claims of the article, they’re going with the “shoot the messenger” approach. This should be fun to watch.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
This entry was posted on June 10, 2016 at 9:21 am and is filed under Commentary with tags Tesla. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Has Tesla Covered Up Suspension Issues In The Model S?
Making the rounds today on the Internet are reports of somewhat widespread issues with the Tesla Model S where the suspension can fail suddenly:
Our investigation began in earnest upon reading a thread titled “Suspension Problem on Model S” in the Tesla Motors Club forum. The original poster (OP) in that thread described the suspension in his 2013 Model S (with 70,000 miles) failing at relatively low speed, saying the “left front hub assembly separated from the upper control arm.” Images of the broken suspension components showed high levels of rust in the steel ball joint and the OP reported being told by Tesla service center employees that the “ball joint bolt was loose and caused the wear,” which was “not normal.” Because his Tesla was out of warranty, the repair was reportedly sent to Tesla management for consideration.
So far, that seems to not all that unusual as I have heard this sort of response from a car company before. But here’s what happened next:
According to a subsequent post by the OP, Tesla management refused to repair the broken suspension under warranty despite the “not normal” levels of wear reported by the service techs. Then, just days later, the OP reported that Tesla had offered to pay 50% of the $3,100 repair bill in exchange for his signature on a “Goodwill Agreement” which he subsequently posted here (a scan of the stock agreement can be found here). That agreement included the following passage:
This is not normal. In short, what Tesla was asking the person to do is give up his right to do things like report this to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Effectively covering up that this problem even exists. That’s very troubling, and likely not legal:
NHTSA spokesman Bryan Thomas said Thursday that the issue involves suspensions in the Model S, Tesla’s largest-selling vehicle. While not immediately disclosing the nature of the complaints, he says the agency is reaching out to Tesla owner and the company to gain more information about the problem.
At the same time, Thomas said Tesla has a “troublesome nondisclosure agreement” that implies customers should not report safety issues.
“The agency immediately informed Tesla that any language implying that consumers should not contact the agency regarding safety concerns is unacceptable, and NHTSA expects Tesla to eliminate any such language,” he said in a statement.
NHTSA says it waas told by company officials that they did not intend to dissaude customers from contacting the government about safety concerns.
That begs the question: Is Tesla trying to cover up this issue? Now the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is apparently investigating this issue, and Tesla apparently isn’t talking about this with the exception of putting out a Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) in March of 2015, which indicates that a “known non-safety-related condition” applied to the front lower control arm of the Tesla Model S. But the optics of this really suck given this fact:
Until NHTSA publicizes the findings of its investigation, the sheer scope of Tesla’s apparent suspension defect won’t be clear. But other reports of suspension breakage are not hard to find, both in the “Suspension Problem on Model S” thread at TMC, elsewhere on that forum or around the internet. A gallery of photos apparently assembled by the hard-working Cassandra in this story shows a disturbing number of wrecked vehicles with broken suspensions. But these photos, like the two reports of Teslas driving off cliffs and other reports of inexplicable crashes, are circumstantial evidence at best. Until experienced investigators perform forensic analyses that can confirm whether suspension failure occurred before any of these crashes, these examples serve only to show the worst case scenario for Tesla.
Clearly Tesla has a major PR problem (at the very least) on it’s hands. What’s worse is that the way this was handled really paints the company in a negative light. Proving the fact that the cover up is often worse than the crime as shown with incidents like Watergate and Iran/Contra.
UPDATE: Let the PR war begin. This post is on the Tesla blog. Among other things, it say this:
Finally, it is worth noting that the blogger who fabricated this issue, which then caused negative and incorrect news to be written about Tesla by reputable institutions, is Edward Niedermayer. This is the same gentle soul who previously wrote a blog titled “Tesla Death Watch,” which starting on May 19, 2008 was counting the days until Tesla’s death. It has now been 2,944 days. We just checked our pulse and, much to his chagrin, appear to be alive. It is probably wise to take Mr. Niedermayer’s words with at least a small grain of salt.
We don’t know if Mr. Niedermayer’s motivation is simply to set a world record for axe-grinding or whether he or his associates have something financial to gain by negatively affecting Tesla’s stock price, but it is important to highlight that there are several billion dollars in short sale bets against Tesla. This means that there is a strong financial incentive to greatly amplify minor issues and to create false issues from whole cloth.
It seems that besides trying to refute the claims of the article, they’re going with the “shoot the messenger” approach. This should be fun to watch.
Share this:
Like this:
Related
This entry was posted on June 10, 2016 at 9:21 am and is filed under Commentary with tags Tesla. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.