Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#71

Post by ricardobeat » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:18 PM UTC

olyjohn wrote: post #64

mulmen wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I rent a car I am not responsible for repairs. If I am on the hook for the repair bill I should get a choice in how the car is repaired. I can buy whatever tires I want for a leased car. If Tesla wants to make these kinds of demands then the repair should be part of the warranty and priced in to the car. > I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy it, don’t! This holds tr…

The benefit of buying it is that you can drive it well after it's paid off. Leasing and trading up all the time means you're constantly making never-ending payments. It's not that hard to sell your car when the time comes to get rid of it.

Those never-ending payments are covering depreciation. Unless you keep your car for 10+ years and it’s one of the rare models that holds value after that, you’re not much better off buying it.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#72

Post by jakemoshenko » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:18 PM UTC

mulmen wrote: post #38

namdnay wrote: post #3

A bit of a stretch to classify this under right to repair.. if you rent a car from tesla, it’s going to be up to tesla to choose how it’s repaired. And it doesn’t seem unreasonable that they won’t accept a hack fix (however safe it may be) - that car is going to be sold to someone once the lease expires, they just can’t take the risk I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy i…

When I rent a car I am not responsible for repairs. If I am on the hook for the repair bill I should get a choice in how the car is repaired. I can buy whatever tires I want for a leased car. If Tesla wants to make these kinds of demands then the repair should be part of the warranty and priced in to the car. > I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy it, don’t! This holds tr…

> The fact that cars depreciate seems like the best reason to "rent" them. The manufacturer ends up dealing with the now less valuable asset.

Except that they charge you for all of the depreciation plus a rental fee. The dealer/manufacturer ends up with an asset that is more valuable than the price they paid for it less the money they've received for it through the terms of the lease.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#73

Post by bri3d » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:20 PM UTC

raz32dust wrote: post #20

When a company like Apple says that only their app store can run on iPhones, HN crowd usually sides with Apple, with the justification that "It is a free market. People can buy another phone if they don't like it." Why doesn't the same principle apply here? If your car company does not offer the right to repair, then buy another car. What is the difference? Both are instances of big companies gating access to their d…

Right to repair and sandboxed/secured device operating system have very limited overlap. The intersection happens when the vendor uses a locked operating system to try to enforce parts-marriage or remotely bricks aftermarket-repaired devices. And, in the few places where this happens with Apple, I think HN are very much on the right-to-repair side.

I think you are conflating two separate conversations with only a small overlap.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#74

Post by fastball » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:21 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #7

I'm very curious about the insurance rejecting the repair. My understanding (I've never leased a car) is that if you lease a car you must have comprehensive (full coverage) insurance. Either the person failed to do what their lease contract (presumably) mandated, or shockingly you can lease a car without full coverage. Obviously it depends on what the insurance policy states, but usually comprehensive insurance cover…

Here[1] is the customer explaining the insurance more thoroughly.

[1] https://youtu.be/vVSw3KSevEc?t=406

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#75

Post by 1123581321 » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:21 PM UTC

leonhandreke wrote: post #51

1123581321 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn’t have comprehensive at all. Comprehensive is cheap with a deductible of a few hundred. People don’t forgo it unless they’re driving a junker. Reading the comments on the article, it sounds like the lack of comprehensive might have been a mistake during transferring policies between cars. If so, that’s a brutal consequence of an easy misclick or misstatement without a double check.

Whether or not he was insured against this particular damage doesn't make the cost of the repair less outrageous. In the end, drivers will be paying for these repairs, whether directly or through "cheap" monthly insurance payments that hide these occasional events. (I guess similar arguments could be made about other insurance markets)

Yes, as you noted, you’re basically describing the general principle of insurance. :)

I don’t own a Tesla but insurance for their cars is already relatively more expensive in several states. This can be readily seen in annual or semi-annual policies. Monthly payment policies that cost more per annum are a concern to me, but don’t factor into underwriting analysis at the make/model level.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#76

Post by shuntress » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:21 PM UTC

belval wrote: post #44

mschild wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, except Tesla has a history of performing just as janky repairs on their cars themselves. Its even stated in the article.[0] Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? Driving around with a shoddy fix on a combustion engine can be just as dang…

> Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? The quote is to replace the whole battery pack so I really doubt that they are making a profit on it since it's one of the actually expensive part of the car. As GP pointed out this is hardly right to re…

This is still an important consideration for any Right to Repair regulation because there needs to be some thought put in to what constitutes "a part".

It would obviously be absurd for Tesla to claim that the entire car is one part so when this coolant fitting breaks the vehicle is totaled.

It doesn't necessarily mean that Tesla must change their designs, recategorize products, or sell "parts for parts" as separate SKUs. But it is probably not unreasonable for Right to Repair regulations to require that Tesla document reports of damage like this and make those documents available to third parties.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#77

Post by Pyramus » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:22 PM UTC

raz32dust wrote: post #20

When a company like Apple says that only their app store can run on iPhones, HN crowd usually sides with Apple, with the justification that "It is a free market. People can buy another phone if they don't like it." Why doesn't the same principle apply here? If your car company does not offer the right to repair, then buy another car. What is the difference? Both are instances of big companies gating access to their d…

Why do you think so? My impression is that the majority of HN is super critical when you mention Apple and right to repair, and rightfully so. Thinking especially of the Macbook keyboard disaster, or discussions that involve Louis Rossmann.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#78

Post by Pyramus » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:23 PM UTC

wnevets wrote: post #68

Pyramus wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you watch the video [1] Chad (former Tesla repair technician) clearly states it's the issue is due to cost effectiveness not whether the car is under lease. It's also not constrained the nose that was damaged here - whenever a part of the battery pack is damaged (could be a single cell) Tesla will replace the whole battery pack but not the part. I believe Chad calls it "assembly replacement". It's not cost effecti…

> It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts Surely its more cost effective for the customer that requires this repair?

Absolutely - when I say cost effective I'm talking on behalf of the company of course.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#79

Post by olyjohn » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:24 PM UTC

iamcreasy wrote: post #39

xmprt wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electrek is a very biased website in favor of electric vehicles so it makes sense they would say positive things about Tesla. Also, the first sentence of that article is about how this is only a thing in Massachusetts because of right to repair laws. If Tesla could, they would brick or make certain systems not operational if you don't use first party parts.

I agree that Electrek is biased, but they usually provide substantive materials in terms of source and quotes to backup their claim. Also, it is a 2017 article, and things have improved since then. For example, Tesla has released their parts catalog for all models. Things are still far from prefect though, as you still can not buy those parts. Hopefully with this new Right to Repair Executive order - this situation w…

What good is a parts catalog if you can't buy the parts?

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#80

Post by throwaway0a5e » Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 9:24 PM UTC

TrackerFF wrote: post #56

The EV market here in Norway (and probably rest of Europe) is out of control when it comes to repairs. Any critical repair, i.e anything close to the battery, often comes in the range of tens of thousands. What happens is that the insurance companies will just opt for condemning the car, and you'll get a brand new one. As you can imagine, the insurance prices are terrible.

>Any critical repair, i.e anything close to the battery, often comes in the range of tens of thousands.

What you're really paying for is the irrational fear.

The shops have to charge sky high prices to a) cover their butts or b) because they know nobody else will do it at a lower price.

Electrical system repairs aren't particularly unknown or difficult. In a slightly more rational market someone would make a killing by specializing in those kinds of repairs. But because people are too scared to entertain the thought of driving these repaired cars some importer in Ukraine is making a killing on all these Norwegian EVs he fixes and you guys are paying for it. And Ukrainians (or whoever, that was just an example of a slightly less rich country) love the cheap EVs because they are not nearly rich enough to entertain irrational fears about repaired vehicles.

There are lots of example of other markets like this where people who can pay a lot of money do pay a lot of money to avoid some irrational fear.