News
Tesla owner shares FSD purchase concerns after vandals set Model X on fire
When Tesla owner Den Dal plugged his family’s 2018 Model X Long Range at a public charger during a recent business trip to Düsseldorf, Germany, he had no idea that it would be the start of a grueling ordeal. Twenty-four hours after plugging in his Tesla, Dal was left with a burned Model X, an FSD purchase that seemed to be up in the air, and a plausible arson incident that seemingly targeted the all-electric SUV.
Den Dal had rented an apartment for his business trip to Düsseldorf which was close to a row of public chargers that his Model X could be plugged in. Unfortunately, all of the public charger’s stalls were being blocked by fossil fuel cars on that day. This resulted in the Tesla owner plugging his Model X at another public charger, which was farther away, about 600 meters from the rented apartment.
The rates of the station were notably higher than Tesla’s charges for its Supercharger Network, but the location at least had a free stall for the all-electric SUV. Dal plugged in his vehicle and went back to his rented apartment, expecting to find his Model X charged and ready to go the next morning.
What he saw was not what he expected at all. To the Tesla owner’s shock, he found his Model X torched, and the burns on the vehicle suggested that it had been deliberately set on fire. A note from the police was placed on the windshield of the all-electric SUV, notifying the Tesla owner that he should head over to the station as soon as possible.
Unfortunately for the Tesla owner, his vehicle did not have a USB drive that was linked to its Sentry Mode feature. Thus, while Sentry Mode was active during the incident, no videos were retrieved from the Model X. The police also stated that there were no local cameras around the public charging station. No other Teslas were in the area either, which may have helped if they were running Sentry Mode as well.
Based on the specifics of the incident, it does appear that the Model X was singled out and deliberately burned. In the street where the vehicle was charging, there were more than 60 cars, some of which were premium vehicles and most of which were from German automakers, yet none were touched. Dal later found out that before his Model X was set on fire, another bike parked in the same area had been torched as well. Local firefighters who responded to the scene also saw where the flames started.
Quite amazingly, the Model X remained drivable despite being burned, which suggested that the vehicle’s batteries and powertrain were still intact after the incident. Describing the vehicle’s status in a message to Teslarati, Dal noted that the interior smelled particularly bad since chemicals of the cooling system seemed to have entered the cabin, as per observations from a Tesla Service Center. Tesla has not provided an update to the Model X owner yet, though there is a pretty good chance that the vehicle may be a total loss.
Dal is a supporter of Tesla and the company’s mission of transitioning the world to sustainable energy, and he purchased Enhanced Autopilot and the Full Self-Driving suite for his Model X despite knowing that the systems’ full features will be rolled out at a later time. That being said, Dal has notable concerns about his FSD purchase after his Model X was set aflame.
The Tesla owner had purchased FSD at a time when Tesla had a discount for the suite, and as such, the system was not insured with the vehicle. From this standpoint, it appears that while the Model X may be insured, its Full Self-Driving system was not. Dal is thus concerned that his FSD purchase will not be carried over if he does purchase another Tesla, which is unfortunate considering that he has not really been able to use much of what Autopilot and Full Self-Driving have to offer yet.
Dal resides in Europe, a region where regulations have forced Tesla to essentially cripple some key features of its Autopilot and Full Self-Driving suite. This results in key FSD capabilities such as Navigate on Autopilot with automatic lane changes and Smart Summon being practically impossible to roll out unless revisions are implemented in the region’s regulations. Tesla is doing what it can to address these regulations, but in the meantime, owners such as Dal, who have purchased FSD with their vehicle, are in a limbo of sorts.
Adding insult to injury, the Tesla owner has unfortunately been subjected to some online attacks from the electric car maker’s critics since posting about his experience online. Some have accused Dal of simply trying to attract attention, while others were insisting that the Model X’s batteries combusted on their own. The former point simply lacks basic empathy, while the latter seems farfetched considering that the Model X remained drivable even after it was torched.
For now, Dal is simply hoping that Tesla could provide a resolution for his vehicle and his FSD purchase. The Tesla owner noted that he would like to acquire another Model X if his SUV is totaled, though he looks forward to hearing about an update from the electric car maker soon.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
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.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
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.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
