Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Suspension Breakage: It's Not The Crime, It's The Coverup (dailykanban.com)
schwit1 quotes a report from Daily Kanban: For several months now, reports have circulated in comment sections and forum threads about a possible defect in Tesla's vehicles that may cause suspension control arms to break. Many of those reports appeared to come from a single, highly-motivated and potentially unreliable source, a fact which led many to dismiss them as crankery. But as more reports of suspension failure in Teslas have come in, Daily Kanban has investigated the matter and can now report on this deeply troubling issue. 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. 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 offer, to repair a defective part in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement, is unheard of in the auto industry. More troublingly, it represents a potential assault by Tesla Motors on the right of vehicle owners to report defects to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's complaint database, the auto safety regulators sole means of discovering defects independent of the automakers they regulate. Reuters also reports today that U.S. auto safety investigators are reviewing reports of suspension problems in Tesla Motors Inc's Model S cars.
"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 offer, to repair a defective part in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement, is unheard of in the auto industry. More troublingly, it represents a potential assault by Tesla Motors on the right of vehicle owners to report defects to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's complaint database, the auto safety regulators sole means of discovering defects independent of the automakers they regulate. Reuters also reports today that U.S. auto safety investigators are reviewing reports of suspension problems in Tesla Motors Inc's Model S cars.
This "deeply troubling" issue is what? A control arm issue?
1) I've had the control arms go out on cars, including an Audi A4. Is this some other kind of failure that is more hazardous?
2) At least on normal sedans this doesn't doesn't generally result in death or major injury the way a car fire may, gas tank explosion etc.
3) Where are the other reports from other users about this deeply troubling issue? They've got 100K+ cars on the road, and actually even though this random website is deeply troubled about this issue, these guys have one of the best safety records going.
4) Any chance this is an astro-turfing campaign or something - the write-up is insanely long.
No legal agreement can override the law. You might be able to sign away your rights, but you can't sign away the governments or ones guaranteed by government. I do not believe any contract provision that bared you from participating with a government inquiry would be legal and depending on whether the terms are severable could invalidate the entire agreement.
This is why you can't sign a legal agreement to be someones slave. You can sign it, but it's not legal, it can't be enforced and any attempt to enforce it is likely to get someone in serious trouble. Just as in that case Tesla can't bar you from talking to NHTSA, the laws about vehicle safety would specifically preclude such a clause. Any attempt by Tesla to enforce such a clause would be dangerous beyond measure to the company. And as I mentioned previously the fact that such a clause exists could invalidate the rest of the agreement.
The person that posted that agreement should have a long and frank talk with a lawyer experienced in vehicle and NHSTA law.
They just responded to this issue on their blog:
https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/grain-of-salt
Interesting how they call out the author for his previous "death watch" on the company.
As usual, there are three sides to every story: yours, mine and the truth.
Will
remove nospam. to email!
Yeah, I'm mildly surprised. Tesla doesn't MAKE ball joints. It BUYS them from someone and they probably are not custom engineered for the unique needs of Tesla's vehicle. Tesla does design the suspension, but this sounds like a defective part rather than an overstressed part. Overall, Ball joint failure in modern cars is uncommon. Which is a very good thing as it often causes complete steering failure and can kill you if the ball joint fails at speed or at the wrong time and place.
BTW, I'm not a big fan of Tesla or Elon Musk. I think electric cars (as opposed to hybrids) are a poor choice for cold climates or long distance driving, and I think Musk is a con artist who will tell us anything he thinks we're dumb enough to believe if it is to his advantage. But his companies do seem to do decent engineering.
As for the agreement. The no admission of fault part seems reasonable. The confidentiality clause seems to me to be unconscionable and if this crap is enforcable, laws need to be changed to make it unenforcable.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Tesla has a slightly different take on this story which is worth reading. I\m not saying they are necessarily right and the customer is necessarily wrong, just that it could be useful to hear both sides of the story:
- They haven't seen this problem on any other cars (and they would know as they own all service centers).
- The car in question experienced a very unusual use case, it was regularly used on a long dirt road and was caked in dirt (it took two tow trucks to retrieve it, one to get it to the highway and another to get it to the service center)
- The NHTSA has not actually opened even a preliminary evaluation
- Their document would not prevent the customer from talking to the NHTSA.
- Tesla regularly meets with the NHTSA and has often issued recalls for defects before they ever became anything close to an actual safety issue
- The blogger who fabricated this issue (sic) is the same person who previously wrote a blog titled "Tesla Death Watch", starting on May 19 2008.
(Those are just a few highlights, read the to make up your own mind)