Connect with us

News

Tesla driving test hell: How DMV examiners’ biases are inhibiting the EV transition

(Credit: Andres GE and Wiimedia Commons)

Published

on

The Professor was looking forward to getting a new US driver’s license. After moving from the East Coast to teach at the University of California, it became pertinent for the 38-year old engineer and scientist to have his own driver’s license again. The coming school year would be different from the last, after all, and with face-to-face classes likely starting again, it was important for the Professor to have the capability to drive the family’s Tesla Model 3 when needed. 

Having extensive driving experience overseas before moving to the United States, the Tesla owner (name witheld as requested) was fairly optimistic that he could pass the Department of Motor Vehicles’ standards. His family certainly looked forward to it, so his wife, who also teaches at the University of California, and their two kids — a 4-year-old and a 3-month old baby — headed over to the Santa Ana DMV. Unfortunately for the Professor, he made a grave mistake.

He drove a Tesla. 

Driving Tests from Hell

It is no stretch to state that California is the heart of the US’ electric vehicle transition. It’s home to Tesla’s headquarters and the company’s Fremont Factory, where vehicles like the Model 3 and the Model Y are produced. The Professor was then surprised when the DMV examiner, after what appeared to be an uneventful drive, told him that he had failed his driving test. As related to Teslarati, the DMV examiner reportedly informed the Tesla owner that he failed because the “technology in the car was not off.” When asked for more explanation, the examiner explained that the Model 3’s acceleration should have been on “Chill Mode” and the steering settings in “Comfort.”

Advertisement

This was inconvenient, but the Professor figured that he should probably just try again. The Model 3 owner ultimately opted to try his hand at another test in the LA DMV, especially since Teslas are extremely common in Los Angeles. For the second time, the family of four headed over to the LA DMV in their Model 3 for another test. The Professor then drove away with his examiner, but not before ensuring that the Model 3 was in Chill Mode and its steering was set in Comfort. But just like his previous attempt, the DMV examiner informed the Tesla owner that he had failed because of the Model 3’s “automatic engage.” Explaining further, the examiner stated that she could feel the brakes even when the physical brake pedal was not being pressed. 

Credit: Teslarati

This set off alarms in the Professor and his wife, as regenerative braking is a feature that is very common among electric vehicles. It is also not in any way connected to a Model 3’s automated features. As they addressed their concerns with the DMV, the manager of the LA office told the Model 3 owners that there was no way for Teslas to disable their automated features. When the Tesla owners asked where she got her information from, the manager stated that she heard it from a customer who visited the DMV a few weeks prior. The manager then extended an offer, telling the Tesla owner that he could retake the exam that same day if he could rent a traditional car. 

This was an unexpected turn for the family, but they were eventually able to secure a Toyota Camry from a rental car company an hour away. But upon presenting the vehicle to the DMV, the LA office rejected the Camry since it was not under the Professor’s name. Ultimately, the Tesla owner was not allowed to take his driving test in the rental car, though he was given the option of renting one from the LA DMV office instead for $140, $40 more than the Camry that the family had initially rented. Unfortunately for the Professor, he was given a failing score once more, despite the DMV examiner acknowledging that he seemed to have a lot of experience driving cars. 

DMV Policies and Customer Advice 

In a later message, the Professor’s wife stated that her husband would most definitely try to get his driver’s license once more, though they would probably wait some time before trying again. The last three tries were quite exhausting, and by the third driving test, the Model 3 owner stated that some DMV staff were already irate. This was not that unusual, of course, considering that the DMV is one of America’s least-liked agencies. It was just quite surprising that in the first two tests, it was the Model 3’s features that caused the examiner to fail the Tesla owner. 

In a response to a Teslarati inquiry about the Model 3 owners’ experience, the CA DMV Public Affairs Office confirmed that there is no policy that prevents customers from taking their driving test in a Tesla. The office added that while the DMV currently has no specific criteria for features like regenerative braking in EVs, it is working to ensure that examiners have an understanding of the function and how it impacts driving. That being said, the agency advised that those who wish to take their driving test in a Tesla should speak to a manager first to avoid issues. 

Advertisement

“In the event (that) a customer has questions about taking a driving test in a particular vehicle, they should ask to speak with a manager before the test. DMV employees who give behind-the-wheel tests receive updated training as necessary,” the DMV Public Affairs Office noted. 

It should be noted that California is arguably the US state that is friendliest to electric vehicles. The state still offers clean vehicle rebates, and there is still a Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate for automakers. It is then no surprise that Teslas are very popular in the state. In 2015, California accounted for 43% of Tesla’s new vehicle registrations, as per data from IHS Markit. This percentage has since decreased as Tesla started selling its cars to more territories — but its California stake is still no joke. In 2020 alone, Tesla still sold 37% of its vehicles in California, despite the pandemic and the company no longer having any access to the $7,500 federal tax credit enjoyed by competitors like the Ford Mustang Mach-E and the Volkswagen ID.4. 

Credit: Tesla Inc.

Insights from CA’s Clean Air Protectors

The California Air Resources Board (CARB), which is charged with protecting the public from the harmful effects of air pollution and developing programs to fight climate change, is among the agencies that are helping push the transition to sustainable transportation. With this in mind, it seemed appropriate to get the agency’s take on the Tesla Model 3 owners’ experience with the Santa Ana and LA DMV. After all, it would be quite challenging to fully adopt electric vehicles in California if some driving examiners or DMV offices were still unfamiliar with how EVs work, or their features for that matter. 

CARB Communications Specialist John Swanton informed Teslarati that while driving tests are not CARB’s area of responsibility, the agency could work together with the DMV if there are widespread issues that could impede the greater goals of California’s transition to Zero-Emission vehicles. That being said, Swanton remarked that driver-assist technologies are becoming more and more common in modern cars, and they are widely accepted as features that enhance safety. 

“While the driver’s license test is not our area of responsibility, we can say that we are not aware of any serious concerns that DMV has with the routine features found in a very wide range of vehicles equipped with driver-assistance technologies. As you are probably aware, these are in use in both EV and combustion-powered vehicles, and are widely accepted to enhance vehicle safety. These systems not only meet state requirements; they are fully certified for use nationwide by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,” Swanton said.

Advertisement

The CARB Communications Specialist further stated that specific features like regenerative braking have long been proven to be very efficient, driver-operated controls that have been utilized since the early days of hybrid vehicles like the Toyota Prius. In this light, at least, it appears that the DMV examiner’s statements about the Model 3’s regenerative braking being an automated feature seems misinformed at best or biased at worst. “Their operation is not unlike the use of an automatic transmission. So it’s safe to say that these are not autonomous features, but rather simply part of modern automobile controls. I think this complaint may be a situation with an individual examiner that DMV management will need to speak to or clarify policy,” Swanton remarked. 

(Photo: Andres GE)

Behind the Times

There is something ironic about the idea of a Tesla driver in California failing a driving test because of the electric vehicle’s basic functions. Numerous driving schools across the globe, after all, are already embracing electric vehicles fully. Los Angeles-based Drivers Ed Direct currently operates an all-electrified fleet of cars for its students. Defensive Driving School, which was founded in 1945, actually offers a “specialty course” on Model 3s called “The Tesla Experience.” These programs suggest that driving schools across the country are already aware that sustainable vehicles are inevitable, and it is in everyone’s best interest to ensure that drivers of the future are fully acquainted with the features and behavior of electric cars. 

And it’s not just the United States either. In Germany, a country famous for its mastery of carmaking, schools like Die Fahrschule have made it their mission to ensure that the next generation of drivers is properly prepared for the era of electric vehicles. In an interview with noted EV advocate Ove Kröger, one of the German driving school’s instructors, Alexander Erler, stated that there are actually advantages to teaching in an EV like a Model 3, since the vehicles provide a calm atmosphere. Remarkably, Erler noted that the presence of Model 3s in the school’s fleet actually helped dispel misinformation about electric vehicles, especially when younger drivers take their EV-skeptical parents along for their lessons. 

Even oil-rich Dubai is no different. Electric vehicles are still a niche product in the Middle Eastern city, but prominent driving schools like Emirates Driving Institute (EDI) are already investing in electric vehicles. The school purchased a Model X to be part of its premium driving fleet in 2018, and since then, the vehicle has been received well. In a conversation with Teslarati, EDI Marketing Executive Disha Bhatia explained that the addition of electric vehicles to the school’s fleet is fully supported by the government. This is a big vote of confidence in EVs, since Dubai mandates all drivers to attend a formal driving school before attempting a driving test. 

“It becomes important for them to also know that if tomorrow, electric cars are the future, then how would driving be any different than that of regular cars? So when (the students) learn on Teslas, they would understand the differences between a normal car versus an electric car. However, they also need to understand that driving is the same. They still need to focus on the same points… the same (focus on safety)… We’ve received great responses from a lot of our customers who are very interested to drive in a Tesla, and they’re very happy to get their licenses,” she said. 

Advertisement

So what exactly happened in the case of the Model 3 owner? It would be very difficult to determine exactly what caused the examiners to fail the Tesla owner, though it appears that a lack of proper information is the prominent culprit. Teslas are ultimately cars, after all, and they serve the same purpose as regular vehicles. They just happen to be more advanced, and in more ways than one, safer, than traditional vehicles. With this in mind, it seems to be a bad idea to be misinformed about Teslas, especially since the vehicles are practically everywhere in the state. 

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up. 

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says

Published

on

tesla model 3 first generation headlight
Credit: Tesla Asia/Twitter

Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.

The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.

Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:

“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”

The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:

“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”

Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story

The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.

Published

on

By

The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.

Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot

Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.

The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.

The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.

The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”

Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”

Napoli said:

“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.

As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.

We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.

My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.

I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”

It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.

Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.

Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.

Continue Reading