A man in New Zealand has won a claim over the delivery of a Tesla Model 3 in less than optimal condition. The man was seeking a brand new replacement vehicle, but will instead be getting the problems repaired at no cost.
According to the NZ Herald, the Model 3 in question was delivered in March but had many problems from the start.
As per the filing, the Model 3 had the following issues:
- Dirt and coffee stain on the driver-side footwell carpet
- Scrapes on the bumper
- Scratched wheel cover
- Marks on the interior and boot linings
- Creased leather on the driver’s side seat
- Scratched side mirrors.
Another issue the man claimed was that the fully charged battery was showing a range of 439 km. The man stated this is less than the advertised range of 491 km, therefore questioning whether it was a new vehicle.
After being shown the damage, Tesla offered to repair the issues as they typically do with any discovered during delivery. The man however did not want the car to be repaired and demanded a replacement vehicle, a request which Tesla denied.
According to the ruling from the Motor Vehicles Disputes Tribunal, the defects on the Model 3 were of a ‘substantial character’. Thus, they met the threshold under consumer law to make Tesla liable for repairs or a vehicle replacement.
Since there was a long waitlist for a new vehicle, the man had to pick between having the car repaired or his money refunded. He wanted a bit of both, requesting repairs and compensation, but the latter request was denied.
As a result, Tesla was ordered to fix the problems with the vehicle at their cost.
- Removing the stain from the driver side footwell
- Replacing the damaged bumper and under tray and;
- Replacing the driver’s seat
However, the man failed in his bid to have Tesla cover his costs to prepare the claim for the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal. As well, he failed to have costs associated with storage, using another vehicle and the diminished value of the Model 3 covered.
As per tribunal documents, it does not appear that Tesla appealed the ruling.
Source: NZ Herald