News
Details behind Model X owner’s $5M+ class action lawsuit against Tesla
Following our report that a Model X owner has filed a class action law suit against Tesla, claiming a widespread defect in the vehicle’s onboard software causes sudden unattended acceleration (SUA), new details behind the suit have been obtained by Teslarati that shows a legal team aggressively targeting the core component to the Silicon Valley-based electric car maker’s fleet of vehicles.
The class action filed in federal district court claims Ji Chang Son – Korean star residing in Orange County, Calif. – crashed through his garage and into the living room of his home after his Tesla Model X accelerated suddenly and without warning on September 10, 2016, approximately one month after Mr. Son took delivery of the electric SUV. The suit claims that “Tesla has failed to properly disclose, explain, fix, or program safeguards to correct the underlying problem of unintended acceleration”, adding that “over sixteen thousand Model X owners with vehicles that could potentially accelerate out of control.
Son’s attorneys gave the court a full account of the development of the Model X, focusing on the company’s claim that the Model X is “the safest, fastest and most capable sport utility vehicle in history.” On the contrary, according to Son’s attorneys. They allege the Model X has a safety defect that permits the car to accelerate at full speed directly into solid objects, such as the exterior wall of Son’s home. In particular, they point out that 8 written complaints have already been filed with the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration from other Model X owners who report similar occurrences while driving their cars.
The lawsuit reads,
“Irrespective of whether the SUA events in the Model X are caused by mechanical issues with the accelerator pedal, an unknown failure in the electronic motor control system, a failure in other aspects of the electrical, mechanical, or computer systems, or some instances of pedal misapplication, the Model X is defective and unsafe. Tesla’s lack of response to this phenomenon is even more confounding when the vehicle is already equipped with the hardware necessary for the vehicle’s computer to be able to intercede to prevent unintended acceleration into fixed objects such as walls, fences, and buildings.
Despite repeated instances of Model X drivers reporting uncommanded full power acceleration while parking, Tesla has failed to develop and implement computer algorithms that would eliminate the danger of full power acceleration into fixed objects.This failure to provide a programming fix is especially confounding for a vehicle that knows when it is located at the driver’s home and is being parked in the garage, yet carries out an instruction, regardless of whether through an error by the vehicle control systems or by driver pedal misapplication, to accelerate at full power into the garage wall.
Further, not only has Tesla failed to fix the problems, it has chosen instead to follow in the footsteps of other automobile manufacturers and simply blame the driver.”
One problem, according to Son’s attorneys, is the software that controls the Automatic Emergency Braking system. Tesla has programmed that feature to disengage in order to allow drivers to make emergency maneuvers, “in situations where you are taking action to avoid a potential collision. For example:
- You turn the steering wheel sharply.
- You press the accelerator pedal.
- You press and release the brake pedal.
- A vehicle, motorcycle, bicycle, or pedestrian, is no longer detected ahead.”
In other words, say the attorneys, a Model X will drive straight into a solid wall if that is what the system thinks the driver wants it to do. “Apparently, this includes situations where the computer believes, rightly or wrongly, that the driver is commanding full power acceleration directly into fixed objects immediately in front of the vehicle.”
Class action lawsuits are complex and highly specialized legal actions. Federal law requires that the damages alleged for the entire class exceed $5 million. The plaintiff’s attorney have done so by claiming that Tesla is aware of at least two other instances in which drivers allege sudden unintended acceleration occurred while driving their Model X at low speeds. They then extrapolate those numbers to suggest that the rate of SUA incidents attributable to the Model X is 64 per 100,000 vehicles — substantially higher than for any other vehicle in history.
Page 12 of JI CHANG SON vs. TESLA MOTORS class action complaint
They point out that the incidence rate of SUA incidents for Toyota vehicles — which grabbed national headlines in 2010 — was far lower. They then go on to remind the court that Toyota paid several hundred million dollars to SUA victims as well as a $1.2 billion federal fine. Notice that the chart included in the pleadings shows an exaggerated and disproportionate projected SUA incidence rate for the Model X highlighted in bright red.
Tesla says its data retrieved from the vehicle’s blackbox shows the accelerator in Son’s Model X was fully depressed when the accident occurred. The question for the court will be whether the driver pressed the wrong pedal or whether the vehicle accelerated on its own. It is unclear whether a software failure would register the pedal as fully depressed even if it was not physically operated by the driver.
Plaintiffs always have the burden of proving their allegations. Attorneys for injured parties often rely on a legal doctrine known as res ipsa loquitur, which is Latin for “the thing speaks for itself.” Loosely translated, it means “we don’t know what is wrong with your product that you designed and built, but you know or should know.” Res ipsa loquitur shifts the burden of proof onto the defendant, which makes it much easier for a plaintiff to prevail in court.
One advantage the plaintiff gains from filing suit is the ability to discover what information Tesla has that is not yet public. Does Tesla know something it isn’t telling its customers? We may find out as this litigation goes forward.
We’ve provided a copy of the entire class action filing below.
[pdf-embedder url=”http://www.teslarati.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Son-vs-Telsa-class-action-8-16-cv-2282.pdf”]
News
Man credits Grok AI with saving his life after ER missed near-ruptured appendix
The AI flagged some of the man’s symptoms and urged him to return to the ER immediately and demand a CT scan.
A 49-year-old man has stated that xAI’s Grok ended up saving his life when the large language model identified a near-ruptured appendix that his first ER visit dismissed as acid reflux.
After being sent home from the ER, the man asked Grok to analyze his symptoms. The AI flagged some of the man’s symptoms and urged him to return immediately and demand a CT scan. The scan confirmed that something far worse than acid reflux was indeed going on.
Grok spotted what a doctor missed
In a post on Reddit, u/Tykjen noted that for 24 hours straight, he had a constant “razor-blade-level” abdominal pain that forced him into a fetal position. He had no fever or visible signs. He went to the ER, where a doctor pressed his soft belly, prescribed acid blockers, and sent him home.
The acid blockers didn’t work, and the man’s pain remained intense. He then decided to open a year-long chat he had with Grok and listed every detail that he was experiencing. The AI responded quickly. “Grok immediately flagged perforated ulcer or atypical appendicitis, told me the exact red-flag pattern I was describing, and basically said “go back right now and ask for a CT,” the man wrote in his post.
He copied Grok’s reasoning, returned to the ER, and insisted on the scan. The CT scan ultimately showed an inflamed appendix on the verge of rupture. Six hours later, the appendix was out. The man said the pain has completely vanished, and he woke up laughing under anesthesia. He was discharged the next day.
How a late-night conversation with Grok got me to demand the CT scan that saved my life from a ruptured appendix (December 2025)
byu/Tykjen ingrok
AI doctors could very well be welcomed
In the replies to his Reddit post, u/Tykjen further explained that he specifically avoided telling doctors that Grok, an AI, suggested he get a CT scan. “I did not tell them on the second visit that Grok recommended the CT scan. I had to lie. I told them my sister who’s a nurse told me to ask for the scan,” the man wrote.
One commenter noted that the use of AI in medicine will likely be welcomed, stating that “If AI could take doctors’ jobs one day, I will be happy. Doctors just don’t care anymore. It’s all a paycheck.” The Redditor replied with, “Sadly yes. That is what it felt like after the first visit. And the following night could have been my last.”
Elon Musk has been very optimistic about the potential of robots like Tesla Optimus in the medical field. Provided that they are able to achieve human-level articulation in their hands, and Tesla is able to bring down their cost through mass manufacturing, the era of AI-powered medical care could very well be closer than expected.
News
Tesla expands Model 3 lineup in Europe with most affordable variant yet
The Model 3 Standard still delivers more than 300 miles of range, potentially making it an attractive option for budget-conscious buyers.
Tesla has introduced a lower-priced Model 3 variant in Europe, expanding the lineup just two months after the vehicle’s U.S. debut. The Model 3 Standard still delivers more than 300 miles (480 km) of range, potentially making it an attractive option for budget-conscious buyers.
Tesla’s pricing strategy
The Model 3 Standard arrives as Tesla contends with declining registrations in several countries across Europe, where sales have not fully offset shifting consumer preferences. Many buyers have turned to options such as Volkswagen’s ID.3 and BYD’s Atto 3, both of which have benefited from aggressive pricing.
By removing select premium finishes and features, Tesla positioned the new Model 3 Standard as an “ultra-low cost of ownership” option of its all-electric sedan. Pricing comes in at €37,970 in Germany, NOK 330,056 in Norway, and SEK 449,990 in Sweden, depending on market. This places the Model 3 Standard well below the “premium” Model 3 trim, which starts at €45,970 in Germany.
Deliveries for the Standard model are expected to begin in the first quarter of 2026, giving Tesla an entry-level foothold in a segment that’s increasingly defined by sub-€40,000 offerings.
Tesla’s affordable vehicle push
The low-cost Model 3 follows October’s launch of a similarly positioned Model Y variant, signaling a broader shift in Tesla’s product strategy. While CEO Elon Musk has moved the company toward AI-driven initiatives such as robotaxis and humanoid robots, lower-priced vehicles remain necessary to support the company’s revenue in the near term.
Reports have indicated that Tesla previously abandoned plans for an all-new $25,000 EV, with the company opting to create cheaper versions of existing platforms instead. Analysts have flagged possible cannibalization of higher-margin models, but the move aims to counter an influx of aggressively priced entrants from China and Europe, many of which sell below $30,000. With the new Model 3 Standard, Tesla is reinforcing its volume strategy in Europe’s increasingly competitive EV landscape.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) stuns Germany’s biggest car magazine
FSD Supervised recognized construction zones, braked early for pedestrians, and yielded politely on narrow streets.
Tesla’s upcoming FSD Supervised system, set for a European debut pending regulatory approval, is showing notably refined behavior in real-world testing, including construction zones, pedestrian detection, and lane changes, as per a recent demonstration ride in Berlin.
While the system still required driver oversight, its smooth braking, steering, and decision-making illustrated how far Tesla’s driver-assistance technology has advanced ahead of a potential 2026 rollout.
FSD’s maturity in dense city driving
During the Berlin test ride with Auto Bild, Germany’s largest automotive publication, a Tesla Model 3 running FSD handled complex traffic with minimal intervention, autonomously managing braking, acceleration, steering, and overtaking up to 140 km/h. It recognized construction zones, braked early for pedestrians, and yielded politely on narrow streets.
Only one manual override was required when the system misread a converted one-way route, an example, Tesla stated, of the continuous learning baked into its vision-based architecture.
Robin Hornig of Auto Bild summed up his experience with FSD Supervised with a glowing review of the system. As per the reporter, FSD Supervised already exceeds humans with its all-around vision. “Tesla FSD Supervised sees more than I do. It doesn’t get distracted and never gets tired. I like to think I’m a good driver, but I can’t match this system’s all-around vision. It’s at its best when both work together: my experience and the Tesla’s constant attention,” the journalist wrote.
Tesla FSD in Europe
FSD Supervised is still a driver-assistance system rather than autonomous driving. Still, Auto Bild noted that Tesla’s 360-degree camera suite, constant monitoring, and high computing power mark a sizable leap from earlier iterations. Already active in the U.S., China, and several other regions, the system is currently navigating Europe’s approval pipeline. Tesla has applied for an exemption in the Netherlands, aiming to launch the feature through a free software update as early as February 2026.
What Tesla demonstrated in Berlin mirrors capabilities already common in China and the U.S., where rival automakers have rolled out hands-free or city-navigation systems. Europe, however, remains behind due to a stricter certification environment, though Tesla is currently hard at work pushing for FSD Supervised’s approval in several countries in the region.
Man credits Grok AI with saving his life after ER missed near-ruptured appendix
Tesla expands Model 3 lineup in Europe with most affordable variant yet
