News
Tesla Model S Plaid totaled by Service Center employee, leaving owner without answers
Update 9/9/22 12:32 P.M. EST: Jeff contacted me personally and told me Tesla has officially shipped a Model S Plaid identical to his now-totaled vehicle. “I just got a call from Tesla, a clone of my Model S Plaid is on the truck heading for Texas as I text you today.”
A $155,000 Tesla Model S Plaid was totaled several days after the owner dropped the vehicle off for a Service appointment. Now, the owner is attempting to find answers.
After dropping his Model S Plaid with only a few thousand miles off at the Plano, Texas Tesla Service Center on Wednesday, August 24, owner Jeff said he received a call on Tuesday, August 30, from an employee. “We have some bad news,” Jeff heard over the phone. “Your car was totaled.”
“I thought it was a joke,” Jeff told Teslarati in an interview. “I found out very soon it was not a joke.”
After arriving at the Service Center the next day, on Wednesday, August 31, Jeff found his black Model S Plaid in the parking lot. The rear passenger door smashed in, and visibility into the vehicle was limited due to many airbags in the car being deployed. The vehicle had been t-boned by another car traveling just two blocks from the Service Center, located at 5800 Democracy Drive in Plano. The repair had already been completed and an employee was driving the vehicle around to ensure it was completed properly.
-
- Credit: Teslarati
-
- Credit: Teslarati
However, the driver of the Model S Plaid, a 31-year-old employee of the Plano Service Center, failed to yield the right of way at a stop sign and was hit by another car. The Model S Plaid was totaled in the accident.
Initially, Jeff was interested in receiving a new car, of course, and there happened to be an exact match of what his Plaid Model S once was at another showroom in the State. He was offered that vehicle on Wednesday, but by Thursday, that had changed. Tesla said they would likely go through insurance, meaning it would take nearly three weeks to get Jeff his vehicle.
The Legalities of the Situation
Teslarati spoke to insurance experts and liability attorneys, who told us the situation in which the vehicle was totaled and determining liability is what truly matters. The fact that this is a customer’s car and an employee crashed it is irrelevant until liability is determined.
We obtained the police report through the City of Plano, which revealed the employee at the Tesla Service Center was at fault. Jeff also told us that when he spoke to the employee driving the vehicle at the time of the accident, they admitted that the accident was his fault.
The report states that the driver of the Model S was officially charged with Failure to Yield the Right of Way at a Stop Sign. The investigating officer describes the accident in the report:
“UNIT 1 WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN IN LANE 2 E/B DEMOCRACY DRIVE FOR PARKWOOD BLVD. UNIT 1 THEN PROCEEDED THROUGH THE INTERSECTION. UNIT 2 WAS N/B PARKWOOD BLVD IN THE RIGHT LANE. DUE TO UNIT 1 FAILING TO YIELD RIGHT OF WAY AT A STOP SIGN TO UNIT 2, THE FRONT END OF UNIT 2 STRUCK THE RIGHT BACK QUARTER OF UNIT 1.”
Illustration of the accident: Unit 1 is the Tesla Model S, while Unit 2 is the Audi A5. Unit 1 is the vehicle at fault, City of Plano officials told Teslarati. (Credit: Teslarati)
The report, obtained by Teslarati, shows there was a second occupant in the Tesla at the time of the crash. The driver is 33. The passenger is 31. Additionally, the Audi A5 that collided with the Tesla was being driven by a 62-year-old who was taken to Plano Presbyterian Hospital.
What’s Next
Tesla has been tight-lipped to Jeff, saying they would be in touch with him regarding the accident within the next three weeks. Tesla may have been attempting to determine liability as its employee who was driving the vehicle may not necessarily be responsible for the accident, especially considering he was t-boned while navigating through an intersection. However, the report filed by the investigating officer determined that the driver of the Tesla was at fault, and the fact that the employee also expressed to Jeff that the accident was his fault would eliminate Tesla’s need to determine this.
Jeff said Tesla has not offered a loaner or a formal replacement vehicle currently, which makes his situation much more complicated. Teslarati reported last month that Tesla had abolished its policy of offering loaners and Uber credits for some service appointments. However, Jeff’s vehicle is totaled, he is without a replacement, and the accident did not happen while he was driving the car, or even in possession of the Model S Plaid.
As of Tuesday, September 6, Tesla has yet to contact Jeff regarding the accident or any information on a replacement vehicle.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
Elon Musk
Tesla showcases Optimus humanoid robot at AWE 2026 in Shanghai
Tesla’s humanoid robot was presented as part of the company’s exhibit at the Shanghai electronics show.
Tesla showcased its Optimus humanoid robot at the 2026 Appliance & Electronics World Expo (AWE 2026) in Shanghai. The event opened Thursday and featured several Tesla products, including the company’s humanoid robot and the Cybertruck.
The display was reported by CNEV Post, citing information from local media outlet Cailian and on-site staff at the exhibition.
Tesla’s humanoid robot was presented as part of the company’s exhibit at the Shanghai electronics show. On-site staff reportedly stated that mass production of the robot could begin by the end of 2026.
Tesla previously indicated that it plans to manufacture its humanoid robots at scale once production begins, with its initial production line in the Fremont Factory reaching up to 1 million units annually. An Optimus production line at Gigafactory Texas is expected to produce 10 million units per year.
Tesla China previously shared a teaser image on Weibo showing a pair of highly detailed robotic hands believed to belong to Optimus. The image suggests a design with finger proportions and structures that closely resemble those of a human hand.
Robotic hands are widely considered one of the most difficult engineering challenges in humanoid robotics. For a system like Optimus to perform complex real-world tasks, from factory work to household activities, the robot would require highly advanced dexterity.
Elon Musk has previously stated that Optimus has the capability to eventually become the first real-world example of a Von Neumann machine, a self-replicating system capable of building copies of itself, even on other planets. “Optimus will be the first Von Neumann machine, capable of building civilization by itself on any viable planet,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
Elon Musk
Tesla Cybercab production line is targeting hundreds of vehicles weekly: report
According to the report, Tesla has been adding staff and installing new equipment at its Austin factory as it prepares to begin Cybercab production.
Tesla is reportedly designing its Cybercab production line to manufacture hundreds of the autonomous vehicles each week once mass production begins. The effort is underway at Gigafactory Texas in Austin as the company prepares to start building the Robotaxi at scale.
The details were reported by The Wall Street Journal, citing people reportedly familiar with the matter.
According to the report, Tesla has been adding staff and installing new equipment at its Austin factory as it prepares to begin Cybercab production.
People reportedly familiar with Tesla’s plans stated that the company has been growing its staff and bringing in new equipment to start the mass production of the Cybercab this April.
The Cybercab is Tesla’s upcoming fully autonomous two-seat vehicle designed without a steering wheel or pedals. The vehicle is intended to operate primarily as part of Tesla’s planned Robotaxi ride-hailing network.
“There’s no fallback mechanism here. Like this car either drives itself or it does not drive,” Musk stated during Tesla’s previous earnings call.
Tesla has indicated that Cybercab production could begin as soon as April, though Elon Musk has noted that early production will likely be slow before ramping over time. Musk has stated that the Cybercab’s slow ramp is due in no small part to the fact that it is a completely new vehicle platform.
Tesla’s Cybercab is designed to work with the company’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system and support its planned autonomous ride-hailing service. The company has suggested that the vehicle could cost under $30,000, making it one of Tesla’s most affordable models if produced at scale. Musk has confirmed in a previous X post that the vehicle will indeed be offered to regular consumers at a price below $30,000.
Musk has previously stated that Tesla could eventually produce millions of Cybercabs annually if demand and production capacity scale as planned.
News
Tesla VP explains latest updates in trade secret theft case
Tesla reportedly caught Matthews copying the tech into machines that were sold to competitors, claiming they lied about doing so for three years, and continued to ship it. That is when Tesla chose to sue Matthews in July 2024 in Federal court, demanding over $1 billion in damages due to trade secret theft.
Tesla Vice President Bonne Eggleston explained the latest updates in a trade secret theft case the company has against a former manufacturing equipment supplier, Matthews International.
Back in 2024, Tesla had filed a lawsuit against Matthews International, alleging that the firm stole trade secrets about battery manufacturing and shared those details with some of Tesla’s competitors.
Early last year, a U.S. District Court Judge denied Tesla’s request to block Matthews International from selling its dry battery electrode (DBE) technology across the world. The judge, Edward Davila, said that the patent for the tech was due to Matthews’ “extensive research and development.”
The two companies’ relationship began back in 2019, as Tesla hired Matthews to help build the equipment for its 4680 battery cell. Tesla shared confidential software, designs, and know-how under strict secrecy rules.
Fast forward a few years, and Tesla reportedly caught Matthews copying the tech into machines that were sold to competitors, claiming they lied about doing so for three years, and continued to ship it. That is when Tesla chose to sue Matthews in July 2024 in Federal court, demanding over $1 billion in damages due to trade secret theft.
Now, the latest twist, as this month, a Judge issued a permanent injunction—a court order banning Matthews from using certain stolen Tesla parts or designs in their machines. Matthews is also officially “liable” for damages. The exact amount would still to be calculated later.
Bonne Eggleston, a VP for Tesla, said on X today that Matthews is a supplier who “exploited customer IP through theft or deception,” and has no place in Tesla’s ecosystem:
Buyer beware: Matthews International stole Tesla’s DBE technology and is now subject to an injunction and liable for damages.
During our work with Matthews, we caught them red-handed copying our technology—including proprietary software and sensitive mechanical designs—into… https://t.co/Toc8ilakeM
— Bonne Eggleston (@BonneEggleston) March 10, 2026
Tesla calls this a big win and warns other companies: “Buyer beware—don’t buy from thieves.”
Matthews hit back with a press release claiming victory. They say an arbitrator ruled they can keep selling their own DBE equipment to anyone and rejected Tesla’s request for a total sales ban. They call Tesla’s claims “nonsense” and insist their 20-year-old tech is independent. Both sides are spinning the same narrow ruling: Matthews can sell their version, but they’re blocked from using Tesla’s specific secrets.
What are Tesla’s Current Legal Options
The case isn’t over—it’s moving to the damages phase. Tesla can:
- Push forward in court or arbitration to calculate and collect huge financial penalties (potentially $1 billion+ if willful theft is proven).
- Enforce the permanent injunction with contempt charges, fines, or even jail time if Matthews violates it.
- Challenge Matthews’ new patents that allegedly copy Tesla’s work, asking courts to invalidate them or add Tesla as co-inventor.
- Seek extra damages, lawyer fees, and possibly punitive awards under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and California law.
Tesla could also refer evidence to federal prosecutors for possible criminal trade-secret charges (rare but serious). Settlement is always possible, but Tesla’s fiery public response suggests they want full accountability.
This isn’t just corporate drama. It shows why trade secrets matter even when Tesla open-sources some patents, confidential know-how shared in trust must stay protected. For the EV industry, it’s a reminder: steal from your biggest customer, and you risk losing everything.
Tesla showcases Optimus humanoid robot at AWE 2026 in Shanghai
Tesla Cybercab production line is targeting hundreds of vehicles weekly: report
