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.

Advertisement
-->

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.

Advertisement
-->

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”]
 

Advertisement
-->

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

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

GM CEO Mary Barra says she told Biden to give Tesla and Musk EV credit

“He was crediting me, and I said, ‘Actually, I think a lot of that credit goes to Elon and Tesla…You know me, Andrew. I don’t want to take credit for things.”

Published

on

General Motors CEO Mary Barra said in a new interview on Wednesday that she told President Joe Biden to credit Tesla and its CEO, Elon Musk, for the widespread electric vehicle transition.

She said she told Biden this after the former President credited her and GM for leading EV efforts in the United States.

During an interview at the New York Times Dealbook Summit with Andrew Ross Sorkin, Barra said she told Biden that crediting her was essentially a mistake, and that Musk and Tesla should have been explicitly mentioned (via Business Insider):

“He was crediting me, and I said, ‘Actually, I think a lot of that credit goes to Elon and Tesla…You know me, Andrew. I don’t want to take credit for things.”

Back in 2021, President Biden visited GM’s “Factory Zero” plant in Detroit, which was the centerpiece of the company’s massive transition to EVs. The former President went on to discuss the EV industry, and claimed that GM and Barra were the true leaders who caused the change:

“In the auto industry, Detroit is leading the world in electric vehicles. You know how critical it is? Mary, I remember talking to you way back in January about the need for America to lead in electric vehicles. I can remember your dramatic announcement that by 2035, GM would be 100% electric. You changed the whole story, Mary. You did, Mary. You electrified the entire automotive industry. I’m serious. You led, and it matters.”

People were baffled by the President’s decision to highlight GM and Barra, and not Tesla and Musk, who truly started the transition to EVs. GM, Ford, and many other companies only followed in the footsteps of Tesla after it started to take market share from them.

Advertisement
-->

Elon Musk and Tesla try to save legacy automakers from Déjà vu

Musk would eventually go on to talk about Biden’s words later on:

They have so much power over the White House that they can exclude Tesla from an EV Summit. And, in case the first thing, in case that wasn’t enough, then you have President Biden with Mary Barra at a subsequent event, congratulating Mary for having led the EV revolution.”

In Q4 2021, which was shortly after Biden’s comments, Tesla delivered 300,000 EVs. GM delivered just 26.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving shows confident navigation in heavy snow

So far, from what we’ve seen, snow has not been a huge issue for the most recent Full Self-Driving release. It seems to be acting confidently and handling even snow-covered roads with relative ease.

Published

on

Credit: Grok

Tesla Full Self-Driving is getting its first taste of Winter weather for late 2025, as snow is starting to fall all across the United States.

The suite has been vastly improved after Tesla released v14 to many owners with capable hardware, and driving performance, along with overall behavior, has really been something to admire. This is by far the best version of FSD Tesla has ever released, and although there are a handful of regressions with each subsequent release, they are usually cleared up within a week or two.

Tesla is releasing a modified version of FSD v14 for Hardware 3 owners: here’s when

However, adverse weather conditions are something that Tesla will have to confront, as heavy rain, snow, and other interesting situations are bound to occur. In order for the vehicles to be fully autonomous, they will have to go through these scenarios safely and accurately.

One big issue I’ve had, especially in heavy rain, is that the camera vision might be obstructed, which will display messages that certain features’ performance might be degraded.

Advertisement
-->

So far, from what we’ve seen, snow has not been a huge issue for the most recent Full Self-Driving release. It seems to be acting confidently and handling even snow-covered roads with relative ease:

Moving into the winter months, it will be very interesting to see how FSD handles even more concerning conditions, especially with black ice, freezing rain and snow mix, and other things that happen during colder conditions.

We are excited to test it ourselves, but I am waiting for heavy snowfall to make it to Pennsylvania so I can truly push it to the limit.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla hosts Rome Mayor for first Italian FSD Supervised road demo

The event marked the first time an Italian mayor tested the advanced driver-assistance system in person in Rome’s urban streets.

Published

on

Credit: @andst7/X

Tesla definitely seems to be actively engaging European officials on FSD’s capabilities, with the company hosting Rome Mayor Roberto Gualtieri and Mobility Assessor Eugenio Patanè for a hands-on road demonstration. 

The event marked the first time an Italian mayor tested the advanced driver-assistance system in person in Rome’s urban streets. This comes amid Tesla’s push for FSD’s EU regulatory approvals in the coming year.

Rome officials experience FSD Supervised

Tesla conducted the demo using a Model 3 equipped with Full Self-Driving (Supervised), tackling typical Roman traffic including complex intersections, roundabouts, pedestrian crossings and mixed users like cars, bikes and scooters.

The system showcased AI-based assisted driving, prioritizing safety while maintaining flow. FSD also handled overtakes and lane decisions, though with constant driver supervision.

Investor Andrea Stroppa detailed the event on X, noting the system’s potential to reduce severe collision risks by up to seven times compared to traditional driving, based on Tesla’s data from billions of global fleet miles. The session highlighted FSD’s role as an assistance tool in its Supervised form, not a replacement, with the driver fully responsible at all times.

Advertisement
-->

Path to European rollout

Tesla has logged over 1 million kilometers of testing across 17 European countries, including Italy, to refine FSD for local conditions. The fact that Rome officials personally tested FSD Supervised bodes well for the program’s approval, as it suggests that key individuals are closely watching Tesla’s efforts and innovations.

Assessor Patanè also highlighted the administration’s interest in technologies that boost road safety and urban travel quality, viewing them as aids for both private and public transport while respecting rules.

Replies on X urged involving Italy’s Transport Ministry to speed approvals, with one user noting, “Great idea to involve the mayor! It would be necessary to involve components of the Ministry of Transport and the government as soon as possible: it’s they who can accelerate the approval of FSD in Italy.”

Continue Reading