Connect with us

News

Details behind Model X owner’s $5M+ class action lawsuit against Tesla

Published

on

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.

Advertisement
-

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.

Advertisement
-

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”]
 

"I write about technology and the coming zero emissions revolution."

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Cybercab fleet grows in Austin ahead of launch event

Published

on

Credit: Teslarati

Tesla is bolstering its Cybercab fleet with the State of Texas’s regulatory bodies ahead of the planned launch of the all-electric ride-hailing vehicle this Thursday.

Seven purpose-built Tesla Cybercabs have been added to Texas’s official automated vehicle registry, appearing in the Texas Motor Carrier Credentialing System (TxMCCS) public lookup just three days before Tesla’s invite-only Cybercab launch event in Austin on September 3.

The records, visible through TxDMV’s Motor Carrier and Automated Motor Vehicle Operator Lookup, list seven 2026 Tesla Cybercabs under Tesla Robotaxi, LLC. Their VINs begin with the 5YJA prefix, distinct from the 7SAYG Model Y robotaxis that already dominate Tesla’s Texas fleet.

Community trackers that scrape the same public database recorded the new entries on August 31, bringing Tesla’s authorized Texas robotaxi total to 276 vehicles: 269 Model Ys and the seven Cybercabs:

Texas Senate Bill 2807, which took effect in late May 2026, created a self-certification framework for commercial Level 4 operations. Operators file through TxMCCS, attest to SAE Level 4 capability, maintain insurance, and keep an active vehicle list.

Tesla completed that process months earlier for its existing Model Y Robotaxi service, which has carried paying passengers in Austin, Dallas, Houston and other markets. Adding the Cybercabs to the same authorization means the new two-seat, steering-wheel-free vehicles are now legally recognized for commercial use on Texas roads.

The timing is deliberate as Tesla scheduled the September 3 event at its Austin campus after sending invitations to selected Robotaxi riders and other guests. The company has described the evening as a chance to “experience the future of full autonomy” and plans to livestream it.

Production Cybercabs, which lack pedals and a steering wheel, have been rolling off the Giga Texas line for months; some earlier examples still carried temporary driver controls for data collection. Registering a small fleet of the finished design immediately before the public event signals that Tesla intends to move the purpose-built vehicle from factory and test tracks into the same Robotaxi app already used by Model Y passengers.

The seven units remain a tiny fraction of Tesla’s overall Texas authorization and far smaller than competing fleets. Registration does not automatically equal unsupervised public rides; it is the legal prerequisite.

Advertisement
-

Still, the sudden appearance of Cybercab VINs in the state’s lookup system, after a year of Model Y-only listings, is the clearest official confirmation yet that Tesla’s dedicated robotaxi hardware is entering the regulatory pipeline at the same moment the company is preparing to show it to invited guests and a global livestream audience.

Whether those seven vehicles appear at the September 3 event or begin carrying passengers shortly afterward, their presence in TxMCCS marks a concrete regulatory step that has been anticipated since the Cybercab concept was first revealed.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla expands driverless Robotaxi geofence in Austin

Published

on

Credit: @JoeTegtmeyer/X

Tesla has expanded the operational geofence for its driverless Robotaxi service in Austin, Texas, marking the first such increase in some time. The updated Service Area for Robotaxi in Austin now spans about 288 square miles and is roughly 9 percent larger than the previous boundary.

This incremental growth adds approximately 24 square miles of coverage, bringing the prior zone of roughly 264 square miles into a broader footprint that better serves northern suburbs.

The expansion extends the geofence northward toward Pflugerville along the US 183 corridor, incorporating additional neighborhoods north of the Domain and areas such as Mesa Park. These additions include higher-end residential and commercial districts that previously sat just outside the allowed operating zone.

Riders can now request unsupervised trips that begin or end in these newly included locations, provided the entire route remains inside the digital boundary:

Tesla first launched public Robotaxi operations in Austin in mid-2025 with a modest initial zone of about 20 square miles. Subsequent enlargements in 2025 and early 2026 steadily grew the map until it covered much of the metropolitan area.

After the last major update roughly ten months earlier, the company held the boundary steady while it collected additional miles and refined the FSD suite.

The modest nine percent increase still matters for daily utility. Longer trips become possible, more residents gain access, and the fleet can accumulate more diverse real-world data across new road types and traffic patterns. Observers note that the added territory aligns with existing Tesla service infrastructure, which could support more efficient vehicle staging in the North end of Austin.

Although the geofence has grown, Tesla continues to operate a relatively small unsupervised fleet in the city. The company has emphasized safety and software readiness over rapid geographic scaling. This latest map update signals that Tesla remains committed to expanding Robotaxi availability in its home market as it prepares for further software improvements and potential Cybercab deployments.

The 288-square-mile zone now gives Austin riders one of the larger driverless service areas currently available in the United States.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s Grok can basically control anything in your Tesla now

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s 2026 Summer Update turns Grok from a talking companion into a true in-car controller, with considerably expanded capabilities. Where the assistant once answered questions and handled navigation, it can now operate hardware and software through ordinary speech, including several requests at the same time.

Grok has become incredibly robust over the past few quarters, and this new ability that Tesla has included with its Summer Update is perhaps the clearest sign of just how capable it has become.

You can issue many commands to Grok at once, and each will be taken care of: anything from headlight control to climate adjustments to mirror folding can now all be taken care of with a simple sentence spoken toward Grok:

Here’s another example I used in my Model Y:

Tesla’s official Release Notes list the core powers of Grok’s new capabilities: Grok can place phone calls from a paired phone, search a streaming service and queue music, adjust climate, and search the Controls panel. Drivers can also ask it questions about the vehicle or the latest features included in a recent software update.

It can also take care of driving settings, dynamics, and other relevant preferences that deal with how the car operates and handles.

Advertisement
-

Tesla Summer Update begins rolling out: a look at the new features

It’s also more of a use case than a novelty feature. Grok was great for learning about something that was being pondered while Full Self-Driving was taking care of the major automotive responsibilities, but it did have some useful functionality when it came to navigation.

Another less-noted improvement is the swift transition that Grok has from thinking of its answer to giving you one. In the past, it would take a few seconds for Grok to truly come up with a valuable response. It now seems that it is improving, at least slightly.

Continue Reading