News
Tesla is looking to eliminate contracts for faster vehicle delivery process
In what appears to be yet another initiative to deliver as many of its electric cars as possible to customers, Elon Musk has announced that Tesla is trying to get rid of paper contracts completely. According to Musk, Tesla’s delivery process should be as simple as a tap on a screen. Under the system, returns for Tesla’s vehicles should be a lot simpler as well.
Musk’s Twitter update came as a response to Tesla enthusiast JD Mankovsky, who noted that his sister-in-law has been in a delivery center for hours waiting for her all-electric SUV’s contracts to be finished. Mankovsky stated that there was a backlog in the delivery center’s contract/legal approval level, causing handovers to be delayed. In classic fashion, Musk promptly responded with an idea in tow.
We’re trying to get rid of contracts completely. Should just be “tap here & you get your car”. Then, if you don’t like it for any reason, just return it like any other product.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 23, 2018
If Tesla does employ what could pretty much be described as a tap and drive system, it would be yet another way for the company to separate itself from the conventions of the traditional auto industry. Issuing and signing contracts, after all, are a well-known, time-consuming aspect of the vehicle delivery process, and it is one practice that Tesla still engages in today. By getting rid of paper contracts, Tesla will separate itself even more from traditional auto sales practices. Such a practice will also make the buying experience of Tesla’s vehicles more similar to consumer tech products than conventional cars.
In a way, using a digital signing system for its vehicles is a strategic move for Tesla. The use of digital contracts, after all, has only been growing over the years. In the United States alone, digital signatures are an option for filing tax returns over the internet, and that is valid in every state today. Tesla would likely need to adapt to additional regulations if or when it starts using digital contracts, but the transition could be done.
Elon Musk’s statement about returning vehicles if customers are not satisfied further emphasizes the idea that Tesla’s vehicles are more like computers on wheels than regular vehicles. Elon Musk has, over the years, underscored the idea that Tesla is a different breed of carmaker, not only in terms of its products but also in terms of its business practices. Returning cars to the company in a manner similar to returning an iPhone to Apple definitely falls under that category. Returned vehicles could even give the company a considerable revenue. Apple, for one, usually uses returned units to be sold later on as refurbished devices. Tesla could employ a similar strategy, opening a lineup between its brand new and CPO offerings.
Looking at Elon Musk’s tweet in the short-term, the removal of traditional paper contracts seems to be yet another way for Tesla to increase its delivery figures. The company, after all, is currently pushing for profitability this third quarter. For Tesla to do this, it would have to deliver as many cars as it can to customers, particularly higher-margin vehicles like the Model 3 Performance, the Model S P100D, and the Model S P100D. Such a system ties in perfectly with the company’s new 5-Minute Sign & Drive system for Model 3 deliveries as well.
In a way, Tesla’s efforts to expedite the deliveries of its vehicles are in the best interests of the company’s customers. Earlier this month, Tesla announced that it had sold its 200,000th electric car in the United States, triggering the phase-out period for the $7,500 tax credit granted to its customers. The tax credit is set to decrease over the next quarters and fully expire by December 2019. Thus, from this point until the end of next year, it would be up to Tesla to deliver as many vehicles as possible to ensure that its customers qualify for a federal tax credit.
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.
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.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
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’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.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
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.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
