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.
Tesla released Full Self-Driving version 14.3.6 last week, and after what was potentially one of the best FSD releases in v14.3.5, there has been a bit of a regression. While there are some bright spots, the changes made to v14.3.6 seem to have backtracked some behaviors.
Overall, it is hard to really complain about FSD in any sense; it has revolutionized how I travel literally anywhere. According to my self-driving app, the last time I went a day without using it was 59 days ago.
However, I think it’s also important to recognize when things are just plain bad with FSD. There are times it does truly mind-boggling things, and I’ll dive into those here. Additionally, I only had these issues on local roads, not on highways. Highway operation, generally, is always incredible other than the occasional complaint about speed or left lane camping.
With those things being said, my personal experience may not represent others’ experiences. A handful of people have said they have had a similar experience on v14.3.6, while others have said it is more than normal.
Turning Hesitancy, Inaccuracy
I’ve noticed more inaccuracy turning into multi-lane stretches of road than in any version I can remember. I’ve had at least three instances of FSD turning into a stretch of roadway that has two or more lanes, and not selecting a lane confidently as it has in past versions.
I think Tesla FSD v14.3.6 is a regression from previous .3 branches
This version in particular has been incredibly hesitant, jerky, and indecisive at times. There’s actually been two drives that I have decided to not used FSD for the remainder of the trip. These were local trips… pic.twitter.com/YobHDOKRS6
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 26, 2026
-
Instead, the car will drive over one of the dashed road lines, and the steering wheel will jerk back and forth before picking the lane. It should be said that it has always picked the correct lane when choosing based on the navigation, but it is still very indecisive. The steering wheel jerking is reminiscent of some of the later versions of v13.
I admit I really hate to see the steering wheel jerking come back. However, I think when Tesla releases v14.3.7, it won’t be present. When there are occurrences of it in FSD versions, it is usually resolved by the following release.
FSD Disregards Manual Turn Signals
This is my biggest bone to pick with FSD other than Navigation issues, but this one seems like it would be such an easy fix.
If Tesla is going to put the word “Supervised” on the end of “Full Self-Driving,” then when I tell the car to do something, it should do it. If I input an increase in speed by pressing the accelerator, the car will immediately respond. It does not disregard my input because it feels it is traveling at the right speed.
FSD should never disobey and turn off turn signals that the driver inputs. Trying to direct the car into the correct lane, I had initiated the left turn signal not once, not twice, but three times, with the car turning it off all three times and continuing in a lane that would end in just one block. The only solution at this point would be to zipper merge.
This goes back to the fact that self-driving’s biggest bottleneck might be rider preference. A zipper merge might have been more than reasonable, might have saved me time that I spent sitting through an additional light cycle, and might be something many drivers would do. I was in no hurry, I traditionally do not try to zipper merge because it feels inconsiderate, and lastly, the car should have just followed my input.
-
This caused me to disengage and drive manually the rest of the way home. Sometimes I just do not need FSD to try to pass every car it can at intersections.
Bird Braking is a Thing of the Past
The big complaint with recent versions of Full Self-Driving has been what we’ve coined as “bird braking,” which is when the car will brake suddenly as a bird flies past.
There have been zero issues with this so far in v14.3.6, which is an excellent improvement.
FSD Might Already Be Taking Note of Driver Preferences
Another thing I have noticed over the past few days is that v14.3.6 seems to already be taking my preferences with navigation into account.
This is something that is supposed to be rolling out with the Summer Update, but I have a hunch it’s already present and might have been included in this v14.3.6 build. On Friday, FSD pulled into an entrance to a local convenience store that it had never attempted to go into before.
Typically, I manually pull into this entrance because it avoids heavy cross traffic at the main entrance. FSD has always chosen that congested main entrance.
I don’t want to get anyone excited but my Tesla running FSD v14.3.6 just:
✅ Pulled into an entrance at my local Sheetz that I routinely pull into manually but FSD never has entered
-✅ Pulled into my assigned parking space at home despite many other spots being vacant https://t.co/ZUShvknTWO pic.twitter.com/83O5a2S0eh
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
Additionally, FSD has pulled into my assigned parking spot at my townhouse community on multiple occasions with this release. This is something that used to happen ocassionally, but not consistently.
It also navigated back to the same convenience store last night, drove through crazy cars scrambling to gas pumps, navigated out of the parking lot correctly, drove me home, and, once again, parked in my assigned spot.
As previously stated, this release just seems to have a few things that need to be brought to Tesla’s attention, and also to make others who use FSD aware of some things that I’ve experienced. I look forward to the next release that will remedy these issues, just as Tesla has always done in the past.
-
Elon Musk’s massive Terafab project, which will be the first true conglomeration between each of his major entities, is set to get its final location soon, the CEO said on Tesla’s recent earnings call.
“The Terafab, we expect to announce a location soon, and provide more details about our plans in that regard. We’ll leave that to the product, the launch announcement rather than try to squeeze it into an earnings call,” Musk said last Wednesday.
Tesla Terafab set for launch: Inside the $20B AI chip factory that will reshape the auto industry
Terafab was announced by Musk back in March and was essentially a massive, vertically integrated semiconductor manufacturing project that would provide all the chips the three companies needed for their AI initiatives without needing third-party companies.
The plant will produce over 1 terawatt of AI compute each year, and will help back up projects like Optimus, Full Self-Driving, and other AI-based projects that Musk’s companies are working on.
In April, less than a month after the project was launched, Intel announced it would join the project, contributing manufacturing expertise and consulting to Terafab as a whole. Intel is one of three chip manufacturers that produce sub-5 nanometer chips at scale. TSMC and Samsung are the other two.
However, there was no true indication of where Terafab would end up, but most believe it will likely be somewhere in Texas. Business Insider has reported that SpaceX plans to build out Terafab in Grimes County, Texas, but this is unconfirmed.
-
Musk confirmed recently that it would not be on Giga Texas property, as it is simply too large.
The sheer scale of TERAFAB is going to be insane.
Elon said it wouldn’t be suitable for anywhere on Giga Texas property because it’s too big:
“We couldn’t possibly fit the Terafab on the GigaTexas campus. It will be far bigger than everything else combined there.
Several… pic.twitter.com/79GbhNNuf4
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 23, 2026
Terafab holds much of Musk’s grand ambitions for the future within its construct. It holds so much responsibility for the future and the biggest projects that Musk’s companies can imagine.
-
“I think this is a very big announcement and it deserves to have its own day in the spotlight and not be squeezed into an earnings call,” he said. “I do think Terafab is going to be an amazing initiative and a necessary one, and one without which we will be constrained in our ability to scale Optimus production, because we simply won’t have enough AI chips.”
He continued by stating that Terafab is necessary for scaling Optimus, which Musk said could be the biggest product of any kind of all time. “It’s crucial to solve that, and we’ll have to solve memory, logic, and packaging in order to scale Optimus.”
SpaceX performed a secret test on a specific portion of Starship with its recent 13th test flight last week, CEO Elon Musk revealed.
Starship’s 13th test flight took place last Friday, and in many aspects, it was one of the most overwhelmingly successful launches in the project’s history.
All of the mission objectives were met without incident, both the Super Heavy Booster and Ship managed to perform safe splashdowns in the Gulf of America and the Indian Ocean, respectively, and the deployment of Starlink satellites came and went without any complications.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 25, 2026
However, there was more on the agenda for SpaceX with Flight 13. Musk revealed an internal test of the ship’s heat shield tiles, as the space exploration company wanted to push them to the limits after previous issues.
Many noticed that Starship’s initial launch seemed to be more accelerated than normal, and that was not a mistake. Musk revealed that SpaceX decided to give Flight 13 an intentionally aggressive acceleration rate in an effort to test how well the tiles would remain attached to the ship:
-
This flight intentionally had much higher acceleration to test how well the heat shield tiles would remain attached at high dynamic pressure.
Test was successful.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 25, 2026
SpaceX had issues with some of the heat shield tiles remaining attached early on in the Starship program. The first six test flights presented some kind of anomaly with them, so the company’s big focus with them was to figure out a way to keep them intact through the duration of the flight.
Things truly improved as Flight 10 showed that ceramic tiles generally stayed attached to the ship far better due to refined attachment, as SpaceX utilized pins instead of adhesives. Flights 10 through 13 truly showed some clear progress with the heat shield tiles, and this latest test seems to be where some real progress was noticed, especially by Musk.
The 13th Starship launch last Friday was the second with Starship V3, SpaceX’s latest and greatest iteration of the spacecraft. Goals and ambitions are getting even grander as the project continues to progress. Musk has already hinted that SpaceX will likely try to catch Starship with Flight 14.
-
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.6 review: a rare regression, but some bright spots
Musk’s massive Terafab project will get final location soon
