Connect with us

Published

on

A Tesla owner in the UK challenged Tesla over its failure to deliver on its full self-driving claims and won a settlement representing a refund of his purchase cost of FSD, with interest, after filing a claim in small claims court.

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving system has been available since 2016, with Tesla stating at the time that all Teslas now have the hardware to fully drive themselves. The system went on sale that year as a $3,000 option, though prices have shifted up and down over time.

But the software… still doesn’t work. While Tesla finally released FSD beta to everyone in the US last year (after gating it behind a “safety score” for about a year), Teslas are still not actually capable of fully driving themselves.

Tesla’s system is still “level 2” on the SAE’s driving automation scale, which means responsibility lies with the driver. Drivers need to pay attention to the vehicle, and should, since FSD can make some pretty dangerous decisions.

The system has raised eyebrows with regulators, lawsuits, and political campaigns all claiming that Tesla advertises the system falsely by calling it full self-driving when it is not.

FSD Beta does deliver on some specific promises that Tesla made – namely, traffic light recognition and automatic driving on city streets. While the latter is not available unsupervised, it has been rolled out to customers – in North America, anyway. FSD Beta has only started being available in a few other territories outside North America earlier this year.

But the UK is not one of those places, and 2023 is not 2019. Which is the source of the claim we’ll be discussing today.

The claim was filed by Tesla owner Edward Butler, who detailed the process in a thread on Tesla Motors Club forum.

Butler purchased a Tesla Model 3 in 2019, along with the Full Self-Driving option at a price of £5800 (about $7,100 USD at today’s rates). He alleged that Tesla has not delivered on specific promises related to its Full Self-Driving option, and thus breached the Consumer Rights Act of 2015. His claim asked for a refund of the price of the system, with interest, and a rollback to eliminate FSD functionality for his vehicle.

Specifically, he cited Tesla’s website which in 2019 stated that traffic light recognition and automatic driving on city streets were “coming later this year.” Since Butler purchased the vehicle entirely from the website and without a test drive, the website description formed part of the purchase contract.

Since then, Tesla has delivered traffic light recognition in the UK, though that feature rolled out in September 2020, after Tesla’s self-imposed deadline. And Tesla has still not yet delivered automatic driving on city streets in the UK, nearly four years later.

Butler notified Tesla of his intent to file, and initially the company denied the claim. Then he filed with the UK courts’ Money Claim Online website, and his case was assigned to his local small claims court.

Once a court date was set, Tesla offered Butler a settlement offer – but initially, that settlement only included a refund of the initial price of the system, with no interest. And worse, for Butler, Tesla added clauses that would restrict him from talking about the settlement or providing anyone else instructions on how to pursue a similar claim.

Butler objected to these restrictions, and told Tesla that he would not accept any claims with these clauses included. After some further back and forth and telling Tesla that he would continue to pursue the court date, Tesla seemingly recognized that his claim was a “slam-dunk,” in Butler’s words, and agreed to the higher amount without the gag clauses included.

Butler says:

From Telsa’s POV, I am the worst type of litigator to take on. I am not a lawyer, but deal with them quite often in my day job so I know enough to put in a small claims action with confidence. The money wasn’t important to me, I felt they’d conned me and I wanted them to do the right thing and put it right. Moreover, because the money wasn’t important to me I was never going to sign up to a non-advice/confidentiality clause, I think it’s important that my experience is out there for others to form their own views from.

The settlement ended up being for £8,015.22, including interest and court fees, which is $9,860USD at today’s exchange rates. As a settlement, this does not set any legal precedents, but it does show that there is a strong case against Tesla, at least in the UK, over violation of UK law in its advertising claims.

Electrek’s Take

This isn’t the first time Tesla has been lost in court over false advertising relating to its self-driving system. Last year, it was ordered to upgrade one driver’s self-driving computer for free after announcing that it would charge owners $1,500 for hardware they already bought.

But small claims is not the most efficient way to hold companies accountable when they make false promises. While it is much cheaper and easier than a traditional lawsuit, because neither side is allowed to bring lawyers and the court filing system is streamlined in comparison, it’s still a roadblock and still requires fees.

It also requires knowledge of the system, which is why Tesla wanted to add a “non-advice” clause to Butler’s settlement. By tamping down on public knowledge of how to file these claims, Tesla can hopefully settle them one by one and not have to pay restitute across its entire customer base, at least 285,000 of which have paid for FSD.

This is why class actions are good at holding companies accountable, because they can combine several claims together. Otherwise, a company isn’t going to care about losing a few thousand dollars here and there – they’ll offer quick settlements and get on with their day.

It’s also why companies prefer binding arbitration clauses, which deprive workers and consumers of their legal right to seek remedy through the legal system or through class action lawsuits. But forced arbitration has been upheld repeatedly by the consumer-hostile “supreme” court of the US, more than half of whom were appointed or confirmed undemocratically, so it stands to reason that they wouldn’t care about what would benefit the public most.

This is relevant because Tesla recently weaseled out of one of these class action lawsuits by claiming successfully in court that all owners must go through arbitration if they want to receive remedy. The court even boneheadedly ruled that one owner who did not accept the arbitration clause was not allowed to sue because they waited too long to do so, even though Tesla’s violation is happening on a continuing basis.

And none of this is great for customer or public perception of Tesla. While they may be profiting off of sales of future software, they could do a lot better for goodwill by offering customers who feel jilted to refund a system which they’ve never been able to use – and may never be able to use over the course of the entire lifetime of the vehicle, given that some have now had FSD functionality for 6 years without it actually being usable yet.

For now, the steps above may not apply to the US the same as they apply to the UK. But if you’re in the UK and want your money back for a non-working Full Self-Driving system, it sounds like the process is relatively simple. Head on over to the Tesla Motors Club forum thread to learn more and see a selection of documents that Butler filed. And if anyone tries the same in the US (or if you have tried it and succeeded in the past), we’d love to hear about it.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Renewable giants shrug off Trump’s anti-wind policies: ‘Electrification is absolutely unstoppable’

Published

on

By

Renewable giants shrug off Trump's anti-wind policies: 'Electrification is absolutely unstoppable'

U.S. President Donald Trump holds up an executive order after signing it during an indoor inauguration parade at Capital One Arena on January 20, 2025 in Washington, DC. Donald Trump takes office for his second term as the 47th president of the United States. 

Anna Moneymaker | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Renewable energy giants appear relatively sanguine about U.S. President Donald Trump‘s anti-wind policies, describing the process of replacing fossil fuels with electrically powered products as “absolutely unstoppable.”

Trump, who promised a new “golden age” for America in his inaugural address on Monday, swiftly took aim at low-carbon energy initiatives.

In a standalone executive order, which had been widely expected, the president temporarily suspended new or renewed leases for offshore and onshore wind projects and halted the leasing of wind power projects on the outer continental shelf.

“We are not going to do the wind thing. Big ugly windmills, they ruin your neighborhood,” Trump told his supporters at the Capital One Area in Washington on Monday. He previously described wind turbines as an economic and environmental “disaster.”

The measures formed part of a much broader energy offensive designed to “unleash” already booming oil and gas production. This included declaring a national energy emergency, promoting fossil fuel drilling in Alaska and signing an executive order to withdraw the U.S. from the landmark Paris Agreement.

Joe Kaeser, chairman of the supervisory board of Siemens Energy, one of the world’s biggest renewables players, seemed unfazed by Trump’s sweeping energy agenda. In fact, Kaeser considered the policies a “slight plus” for the German energy technology group.

Shares of Siemens Energy jumped more than 8% on Wednesday morning, hitting a new 52-week high.

“We need to see what’s behind all the executive orders and the policies. So far, I believe there are many areas where actually Siemens Energy benefits a lot,” Kaeser told CNBC’s Dan Murphy at the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland on Tuesday.

There will be uncertainty for low-carbon energy sectors, such as onshore and offshore wind, Kaeser said, before adding that Trump’s measures were unlikely to directly impact Siemens Energy. That’s partly because roughly 80% of the firm’s wind market is in Europe, Kaeser said.

European Union is not prepared for Trump 2.0, top German business executive says

“So, I believe that doesn’t move the needle. I’m much more worried about the European economies and how they deal with a very powerful nation, with a very powerful concept. We may or may not like it, because it’s got some nationalistic type of things, but if we look at it from the view of the American people, we better get something going,” Kaeser said.

Beyond onshore and offshore wind, Kaeser said Siemens Energy was well positioned to capitalize from a “booming” electrification market.

“Think about the data centers, artificial intelligence, we have waiting times now on large gas turbines. Actually, customers are coming and saying, hey can I make a reservation and I’ll pay you for a reservation? Just think about that. It hasn’t happened for a long time,” Kaeser said.

“I believe the electrification age has just begun. Whether that’s gas turbines or wind or solar or something else, we’ve got everything, and the customers decide in the end. And one thing I believe one should not underestimate, the White House is not buying much [but] the customer does,” he added.

‘Very, very optimistic’

Spanish renewable energy giant Iberdrola was similarly bullish about the road to full electrification, describing the transition away from fossil fuels as “absolutely unstoppable.”

“We are seeing that probably we are in the best moment for electrification,” Ignacio Galán, executive chairman of Iberdrola, told CNBC at WEF on Tuesday.

Galán cited soaring global demand for electrically powered data centers, low-emission vehicles as well as cooling and heating applications.

A logo on the nacelle of a wind turbine at the Martin de la Jara wind farm, operated by Iberdrola SA, in the Martin de la Jara district of Sevilla, Spain, on Friday, April 21, 2023.

Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

“All of those things require more electricity 24 hours a day. Our business in the United States is mostly in this area, which is networks … and the regulation depends on the state authority, so I think that is not really affected at all,” Galán said.

“Depending on the legislation, we will make more or less investment in another part of our business,” he added, referring to Trump’s energy policy.

“We are very, very optimistic about the United States and the future,” Galán said.

Wind power woes

Shares of some European wind power giants fell shortly after Trump took aim at wind power plans.

Denmark’s Orsted, which recently announced a roughly $1.7 billion impairment charge on U.S. projects, dipped 4.4% on Wednesday morning, extending steep losses from the previous session.

The rapidly growing offshore wind sector has endured a torrid time in recent years, hampered by rising costs, supply chain disruption and higher interest rates.

Windmills pictured during a press moment of Orsted, on Tuesday 06 August 2024, on the transportation of goods with Heavy Lift Cargo Drones to the offshore wind turbines in the Borssele 1 and 2 wind farm in Zeeland, Netherlands. 

Nicolas Maeterlinck | Afp | Getty Images

Artem Abramov, head of new energies research at Rystad Energy, said Trump’s energy agenda essentially means the likelihood of any new offshore developments in the U.S. has fallen to zero — at least for now.

“The US currently has around 2.4 gigawatts (GW) of advanced-stage offshore wind developments that have reached final investment decision and are under construction, which are unlikely to be impacted by the order,” Abramov said in a research note published Tuesday.

“Moderate risk amid the unfavorable investment climate is present for 10.5 GW of projects which secured necessary permits but have not reached investment decisions,” Abramov said.

“The remaining 25 GW of early-stage projects are unlikely to see any progress under the current administration,” he added.

— CNBC’s Spencer Kimball contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Environment

Trump’s first day, Hyundai lease deals, and Volvo’s EVs arrive in the US

Published

on

By

Trump's first day, Hyundai lease deals, and Volvo's EVs arrive in the US

On today’s episode of Quick Charge, President Trump has a wild first day in office, but it’s not ALL bad, either. Plus: Tesla gets diner integration, Hyundai keeps the deal train rolling, and it’s dad’s 80th birthday.

We also look ahead to some possible discounts for Tesla insurance customers, some news on the upcoming “cheap” Cybertruck, and wonder out loud if Puerto Rico’s billion dollar solar project is going to see the light of day. All this and more – enjoy!

Prefer listening to your podcasts? Audio-only versions of Quick Charge are now available on Apple PodcastsSpotifyTuneIn, and our RSS feed for Overcast and other podcast players.

New episodes of Quick Charge are recorded, usually, Monday through Thursday (and sometimes Sunday). We’ll be posting bonus audio content from time to time as well, so be sure to follow and subscribe so you don’t miss a minute of Electrek’s high-voltage daily news.

Got news? Let us know!
Drop us a line at tips@electrek.co. You can also rate us on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, or recommend us in Overcast to help more people discover the show.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Stripe cuts 300 jobs in product, engineering and operations

Published

on

By

Stripe cuts 300 jobs in product, engineering and operations

The Stripe logo on a smartphone with U.S. dollar banknotes in the background.

Budrul Chukrut | SOPA Images | LightRocket via Getty Images

Stripe cut 300 jobs, representing about 3.5% of its workforce, mostly in product, engineering and operations, CNBC has confirmed.

The payments company, valued at about $70 billion in the private markets, still expects to increase headcount by 10,000 by the end of the year, which would be a 17% increase, and is “not slowing down hiring,” according to a memo to staff from Chief People Office Rob McIntosh. Business Insider reported earlier on the cuts and the memo.

A Stripe spokesperson also confirmed to CNBC that a cartoon image of a duck with text that read, “US-Non-California Duck,” was accidentally attached as a PDF to emails sent to some of the employees who were laid off. Some of the emails mistakenly provided affected employees with an incorrect termination date, the spokesperson said.

McIntosh sent a follow-up email to staffers apologizing for the “notification error” and “any confusion it caused.”

“Corrected and full notifications have since been sent to all impacted Stripes,” he wrote.

In 2022, Stripe cut roughly 1,100 jobs, or 14% of its workers, downsizing alongside most of the tech industry, as soaring inflation and rising interest rates forced companies to focus on profits over growth. The Information reported that Stripe had a few dozen layoffs in its recruiting department in 2023.

Stripe’s valuation sank from a peak of $95 billion in 2021 to $50 billion in 2023, before reportedly rebounding to $70 billion last year as part of a secondary share sale. The company ranked third on last year’s CNBC Disruptor 50 list.

In October, Stripe agreed to pay $1.1 billion for crypto startup Bridge Network, whose technology is focused on making it easy for businesses to transact using digital currencies. 

Brothers Patrick and John Collison, who founded Stripe in 2010, have intentionally steered clear of the public markets and have given no indication that an offering is on the near-term horizon. Total payment volume at the company surpassed $1 trillion in 2023.

WATCH: Early Bridge investor weighs in on $1.1 billion Stripe deal

Early Bridge investor weighs in on $1.1 billion Stripe deal

Continue Reading

Trending