Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

tiremeetsroad.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 383 posts

Re: Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

#131

Post by zdragnar »

falcolas wrote: post #88
themitigating wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you finance a car through a bank the bank owns the car, they have the title (US).

No (or rather, I have never seen this where I live in the US), they have a lien on the title. You still have the title. Source: Trying to get a bank to remove the lien after it’s fully paid off can be a real source of frustration.

That varies by state. Where I live, the financing institution with the lien keeps the title until it is paid off.

Kinda nice when you trade in a car you still owe a bit of money on, as you don't really need to bring anything with you other than the key and your drivers license; the dealer does all the work getting it cleared and transferred.

Re: Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

#132

Post by zajio1am »

aneutron wrote: post #4

While this is an "interesting" story, I'd love to get some verification on it. It sounds plausible, but almost illegal ? I'm in EU so don't know how really things work over there, but I would assume Tesla would need a judicial order siding with the bank to be able to do this ? I mean it's probably not the wild west over there. Or is it ?

> I'm in EU so don't know how really things work over there, but I would assume Tesla would need a judicial order siding with the bank to be able to do this ?

If a car was used as collateral for a loan, then bank would need a judicial order. But common way to buy a new car is leasing, where the car is owned by the leasing company during the period of the contract. If the contract says that lease is terminated when payments are not done, then i do not see why would leasing company need judicial order, when it is legal owner of the car (unless there is a specific legislation related to such kind of leases).

Re: Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

#133

Post by adventured »

aneutron wrote: post #28
parsimo2010 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US this is legal. Banks are authorized to repossess property if you’re late on a payment^. Private companies are allowed to participate in repossession as long as they don’t break any other laws. Tesla didn’t break into the owner’s house to steal their passwords or keys, they didn’t assault the owner. All they did was take his car. They verified that they were taking the correct car. Since the repossession was…

Thanks very much for the answer. I assumed that it would have to go through the judiciary, but I am surprised to see it's not the case. It does make sense, especially if it's not abusive (e.g. one month behind equals reposession)

The other big thing at play here, is that car lenders get about 1/3 of the expected loan value if they repo the vehicle. Most of them don't want to do it unless they have to, it's usually far more profitable if the consumer continues making payments.

The court typically only gets involved if the lender has reason to believe you might do something malicious and can convince the court to execute an immediate right to seize the vehicle (quickly after default). A court can also order a person to return the vehicle, if they've managed to successfully evade the repossession action by hiding it. This is a good thing so long as it's reasonably balance (ie the consumer doesn't get their vehicle repo'd on day one of being late), so our court system isn't filled up with car loans.

Re: Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

#134

Post by ctdonath »

chrisseaton wrote: post #122
Retric wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most US car dealerships will make a new key for someone repossessing a car. As Tesla is the dealership this seems like the exact same situation, the only difference is someone with the key can now remote summon the car.

> someone with the key can now remote summon the car Cars with remote summons features today basically just crawl forward a few metres to help you get out of a parking spot. They aren't self-driving across town to a repossession lot, if that's what you're thinking.

A first step. Won’t be long before the car goes to the repossession lot itself.

Tesla is evolving country music: not only will your girl leave you, so will your truck.

Re: Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

#135

Post by knorker »

rvz wrote: post #81
knorker wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, if you don't pay for it then it's the bank's car. It's like saying "the super stole my TV!!" when actually the super just let the police in with a search warrant, and they took the TV you stole down to the station.

Tesla still has remote access to the cars its has sold and can unlock them if the authorities request them to do so. If that is not a backdoor I don't know what is. Evidently, the car isn't yours, even though you have paid for it. Tesla still owns it.

I didn't say there was no backdoor.

Every locksmith in the world has the ability to bypass your lock (exaggeration). That doesn't make them the owner.

Re: Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

#137

Post by adventured »

msh wrote: post #16
aneutron wrote: post #4

While this is an "interesting" story, I'd love to get some verification on it. It sounds plausible, but almost illegal ? I'm in EU so don't know how really things work over there, but I would assume Tesla would need a judicial order siding with the bank to be able to do this ? I mean it's probably not the wild west over there. Or is it ?

A lot of law enforcement is privatized in the USA so a lot of things that would be very illegal in most EU countries is ok there (fx bounty hunters)

Bounty hunters are uncommon in the US and very little of the law enforcement system is privatized in the US. It's in fact rare compared to the number of government law enforcement officers we have (local cops, county cops, state cops, federal cops, prison & jail cops, specialized, etc).

Having eg a private security guy working at your grocery store is not privatized law enforcement. That's the equivalent of a bar bouncer watching the property, not the equivalent of law enforcement and they don't have the legal powers of law enforcement either.

Re: Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

#138

Post by jchw »

ctdonath wrote: post #134
chrisseaton wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> someone with the key can now remote summon the car Cars with remote summons features today basically just crawl forward a few metres to help you get out of a parking spot. They aren't self-driving across town to a repossession lot, if that's what you're thinking.

A first step. Won’t be long before the car goes to the repossession lot itself. Tesla is evolving country music: not only will your girl leave you, so will your truck.

I don’t usually vote up comments that are mostly humorous on HN, but there’s always an exception.

To me the problem isn’t that they might, but that they can. I guess the fault is technically on the person who rented something under terrible terms, but the problem to me is that over time terrible terms seem to win out over reasonable ones.

Not to mention, if Tesla is capable of doing this for rentals, I have to assume they are capable of doing it for any Tesla. Which is not great.

Re: Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

#139

Post by teh_klev »

scoopertrooper wrote: post #31
staticassertion wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, though I think that ideally companies are advocates for their customers. For example, companies have to turn information over to courts, but they can push back on some, and publish transparency reports for others. Yes, they have to comply with the law, but imo a company has an obligation to advocate for their customers.

Well, technically, the bank owns the car till you pay it off. So, maybe they are advocating for their customers?

In the UK there's a couple of ways this works:

1. Unsecured loan - if you have the credit facility available then you can borrow an unsecured amount of money and purchase a car. Neither the seller nor the bank have any ownership interest in the car. The loan isn't secured on the car. You are free to sell the car on and transfer its title to anyone else. If you default on the loan then different proceedings may take place to recover the money owed, but that may not necessarily include re-possessing the car (if it's valued under GBP3000.00). The loan company can come after any of your assets.

2. Hire Purchase - the seller lends you through a credit company the price of the car (and interest). The seller transfers the title of the to the credit company. You do not become the "owner" of the car, instead you rent it until such time the total amount of the loan is paid off. You don't have any right to sell or transfer ownership of the car. If you do the unfortunate buyer of the car may wake up one morning to find that it's been repossessed. This is why as a buyer performing HPI checks for any outstanding hire purchase or secured loans on the car are fairly important.

There are also other schemes such as leasing which make it more obvious that if you don't keep up with the payments then the seller or finance company can come along and repossess the car.

Re: Tesla remotely unlocks Model 3 car, uses smart summon to help repo agent

#140

Post by kube-system »

ryanmercer wrote: post #49
simonh wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's quite right, you own the vehicle legally and you owe the bank the loan. However as soon as a repossession takes place the legal title to the vehicle does change.

You don't own the vehicle if you have a loan, the bank has the title. The title holder is the owner. The best part about paying off a financed car, to me anyway, is the day the title shows up in the mail and you actually own your car.

> You don't own the vehicle if you have a loan, the bank has the title. The title holder is the owner.

No, the listed owner on the title is the owner, no matter who has possession of the title.

Post reply on HN