Salvage Titles and Supercharging

cybertruck808

Well-known member
First Name
Ray
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
56
Reaction score
41
Location
Washington, DC via NYC via Honolulu
Vehicles
Jeep Renegade
Occupation
Military
Country flag
I just read an article about Tesla disabling salvage title vehicles from accessing the supercharging network (and other third party fast chargers); the policy has been in place for months, but I am just finding about it now.

Apparently, it is due to safety issues. If the battery has been damaged in an accident, then there is an increased risk of fire, etc., if attached to a fast charger. This is risk that Tesla rightfully doesn't want to accept.

The problem I've been reading, however, is that there is no way to remove a salvage title from this restriction list so to speak. It seems to be that once you're listed as a salvage title for fast charging purposes, that's a wrap for you, which would be upsetting especially if it can be proved that there is no damage to the battery pack on your vehicle.

Considering that the supercharger network is the main reason why I would pick Tesla above any other EV manufacturer, disallowing salvage titles from using the supercharger network (and other third party fast chargers) is a MAJOR problem going forward. To be fair, I'm hearing mixed things about this, but that only adds to the uncertainty level. I hear that it's possible to recertify your Tesla if it does get into an accident, but then I'm reading countless other articles stating that once your vehicle is listed as a "salvage title," it will permanently retain that designation for supercharging purposes.

I'm curious to hear if others have any insight on this issue. If things are as I fear, I will most likely forego buying a CT, especially as one who would be relying on a supercharger once I move back to Hawaii as my high rise complex doesn't have an EV charging station/outlets. This is a real bummer :(

Some articles on the matter:

https://electrek.co/2020/02/12/tesla-disables-supercharging-salvaged-vehicles/

https://insideevs.com/news/405581/tesla-no-supercharging-salvage-rich-rebuilds/

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-salvag-vehicles-the-red-headed-stepchild/
Sponsored

 
OP
OP

cybertruck808

Well-known member
First Name
Ray
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
56
Reaction score
41
Location
Washington, DC via NYC via Honolulu
Vehicles
Jeep Renegade
Occupation
Military
Country flag
Thanks. My concern is over the different standards that exist by state for issuing a salvage title to a vehicle and the uncertainty that brings for those who may be involved in a seemingly minor accident.

I'm hoping that Tesla creates a certification process for salvage title vehicles so that they can hook up to the supercharger network.
 

Fabville

Well-known member
First Name
Kevin
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Threads
0
Messages
72
Reaction score
68
Location
Western Washington
Website
www.fabville.com
Vehicles
2020 Tesla Model X, 2015 Model S P85D, AWD CT
Country flag
I can’t remember which video it was, but I think he mentioned it was around $2K for him to have his car re-certified by Tesla if I remember right. Then, months later they decided to disable the supercharging yet again. I don’t believe he received any kind of refund for the recertification either.
 

Newton

Well-known member
First Name
Newton
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Threads
16
Messages
1,081
Reaction score
1,530
Location
East Bay Area, CA
Vehicles
p̶r̶i̶u̶s̶ c̶,̶ y̶o̶t̶a̶ p̶i̶c̶k̶u̶p, ⼕丫⻏?尺セ尺ㄩ⼕长
Country flag
I dont really care about tesla limiting supercharging to protect their stuff.
but limiting fast charging on other peoples chargers (not tesla related) is just wrong. essentailly making your car useless. but more worrysome to me is the fact that they can and do this and you just have to deal with it. a salvage title dosnt mean the cars destroyed at all.
 
Last edited:

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Threads
4
Messages
3,213
Reaction score
3,405
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
The potential liability is on Tesla whether a potentially damaged battery pack explodes on a super charger or a CHAdeMO charger. To insure that there is no explosion in any case Tesla disables charging. Period. Now, of course, a clever enough guy can cobble together his own BMS and charge from an EA station. If the battery explodes Tesla can argue that they did everything they could to prevent this battery from ever being used and hope the court doesn't accept plaintiffs argument that clearly even that wasn't enough.
 


Ehninger1212

Well-known member
First Name
Jake
Joined
Dec 18, 2019
Threads
4
Messages
1,222
Reaction score
2,522
Location
Houston, TX
Vehicles
Audi A3 E-Tron - 2005 Land Rover LR3 - T-Bucket - 1951 chevy 3100
Occupation
Architect/Fabricator
Country flag
So why dont other OEM limit your use of gas pumps if you have a salvage title.. oh right.. BECAUSE THATS STUPID.

I think this is going to far.
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Threads
4
Messages
3,213
Reaction score
3,405
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
For starters because there is no way they could do that. Second, while it is certainly true that people have injured themselves working on gas tanks (there is a reason they fill them with sand before welding things to them) the dangers are different with batteries and, maybe most pertinently, less, at this point in time, understood.

Perhaps I'm not understanding this correctly but if No. 5 is correct it is not that they are limiting charging at SC but are setting the car to disable fast charging from any source.

It isn't stupid for Tesla to do everything they can do to protect themselves in these hyper litigious times and be assured that they don't care a whit about whether any of us disagree with that posture or not. As a stockholder, of course, I approve.
 

Newton

Well-known member
First Name
Newton
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Threads
16
Messages
1,081
Reaction score
1,530
Location
East Bay Area, CA
Vehicles
p̶r̶i̶u̶s̶ c̶,̶ y̶o̶t̶a̶ p̶i̶c̶k̶u̶p, ⼕丫⻏?尺セ尺ㄩ⼕长
Country flag
For starters because there is no way they could do that. Second, while it is certainly true that people have injured themselves working on gas tanks (there is a reason they fill them with sand before welding things to them) the dangers are different with batteries and, maybe most pertinently, less, at this point in time, understood.

Perhaps I'm not understanding this correctly but if No. 5 is correct it is not that they are limiting charging at SC but are setting the car to disable fast charging from any source.

It isn't stupid for Tesla to do everything they can do to protect themselves in these hyper litigious times and be assured that they don't care a whit about whether any of us disagree with that posture or not. As a stockholder, of course, I approve.
perhaps thats is true, preventing fast charging from any source. but as we know there are literally thousands of salvage title cars that are perfectly safe for SC.

The issue I have is if Tesla decides its not safe. It shouldn't be Tesla's decision that disallows me from using MY car from 3rd party, non tesla charging.
I hold responsibility of what happens with something I payed for, not them. EXample: if the car blows up and burns down a charger, im responsible, no them. they arnt a government entity.


this is what tesla said from the electrek article:
"Tesla reserves the right to deactivate Supercharging capability on any vehicle we believe would be unsafe. If a vehicle is found to have been modified to enable Supercharging and/or fast-charging through third parties, Tesla may take legal action and seek compensation.”

the rich rebuilds guy says they allowed his charging, than disallowed it later, or course we dont know how true this is, but the fact is they can do this, at their will.
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Threads
4
Messages
3,213
Reaction score
3,405
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
The issue I have is if Tesla decides its not safe. It shouldn't be Tesla's decision that disallows me from using MY car from 3rd party, non tesla charging.
I hold responsibility of what happens with something I payed for, not them.
Unfortunately, our current legal system doesn't see it that way. They are responsible if you harm yourself or someone else with their product even if they warned you not to do whatever it was you did and you did it anyway. So obviously their best bet is to prevent you from doing anything potentially dangerous with their product. And they have every right to do so. Charging is managed by software. You do not own the software in your Tesla any more than you own the software in your smart phone. All you have is a license.

I don't like it either but it is this way it is when the workings of a society are set by lawyers and bureaucrats. If you don't like it, don't buy a Tesla.
 

Newton

Well-known member
First Name
Newton
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Threads
16
Messages
1,081
Reaction score
1,530
Location
East Bay Area, CA
Vehicles
p̶r̶i̶u̶s̶ c̶,̶ y̶o̶t̶a̶ p̶i̶c̶k̶u̶p, ⼕丫⻏?尺セ尺ㄩ⼕长
Country flag
I see, i see. Live and learn.
 


Red61224

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Threads
5
Messages
334
Reaction score
435
Location
//
Vehicles
Yugo
Country flag
I can’t remember which video it was, but I think he mentioned it was around $2K for him to have his car re-certified by Tesla if I remember right. Then, months later they decided to disable the supercharging yet again. I don’t believe he received any kind of refund for the recertification either.
Exactly, a salvage title means you have a nice "town car" and will NEVER see a Super Charger ever again. Cut off at the knees.
 
OP
OP

cybertruck808

Well-known member
First Name
Ray
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
56
Reaction score
41
Location
Washington, DC via NYC via Honolulu
Vehicles
Jeep Renegade
Occupation
Military
Country flag
Unfortunately, our current legal system doesn't see it that way. They are responsible if you harm yourself or someone else with their product even if they warned you not to do whatever it was you did and you did it anyway. So obviously their best bet is to prevent you from doing anything potentially dangerous with their product. And they have every right to do so. Charging is managed by software. You do not own the software in your Tesla any more than you own the software in your smart phone. All you have is a license.

I don't like it either but it is this way it is when the workings of a society are set by lawyers and bureaucrats. If you don't like it, don't buy a Tesla.
I'm not sure if I agree with this. I'm pretty sure that Tesla could completely shield itself from liability via third party chargers if it wanted to; doesn't seem that difficult to do. Indeed, based on the Tesla logic, there is a higher risk of a salvage title vehicle catching fire at any charging station (fast or conventional . . . yes, there would be an even higher risk at a fast charger), but they haven't prohibited slower chargers. This seems more like Tesla wanting to avoid bad publicity if one of their salvage title vehicles catches fire while charging at any fast charger.

Tesla knows whether you're utilizing fast chargers due to its software programs, but the charging ultimately is not done by software (or rather, the software isn't absolutely necessary to utilize a charger). Tesla's software is not inherently implicated if you decide to charge. Note, I'm dubious as to whether Tesla can even legally prevent you from charging your vehicle at a third party fast charger, though I can't afford to be the test case. To be sure, Tesla could decide to stop giving you software updates and allowing the use of other Tesla services if you breach agreement with the company, but to actually try to prevent you from charging at a third party, unconnected fast charging service seems illegal as an unconscionable contract.
 

Red61224

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Threads
5
Messages
334
Reaction score
435
Location
//
Vehicles
Yugo
Country flag
Unfortunately, our current legal system doesn't see it that way. They are responsible if you harm yourself or someone else with their product even if they warned you not to do whatever it was you did and you did it anyway. So obviously their best bet is to prevent you from doing anything potentially dangerous with their product. And they have every right to do so. Charging is managed by software. You do not own the software in your Tesla any more than you own the software in your smart phone. All you have is a license.

I don't like it either but it is this way it is when the workings of a society are set by lawyers and bureaucrats. If you don't like it, don't buy a Tesla.
I hear you. What if all the other car manufacturers played this way. Ouch.
 
OP
OP

cybertruck808

Well-known member
First Name
Ray
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
56
Reaction score
41
Location
Washington, DC via NYC via Honolulu
Vehicles
Jeep Renegade
Occupation
Military
Country flag
Exactly, a salvage title means you have a nice "town car" and will NEVER see a Super Charger ever again. Cut off at the knees.
I'm still keeping my reservation for the time being. If Tesla changes this policy by the time that it is time to move further with my order, then I'm go through with the the purchase. Otherwise, I won't, which pains me to write, as the value of my Tesla (which is increased significantly by access to superchargers) would diminish as far as what I could do/where I could reasonably drive.
Sponsored

 
 




Top