News
Opinion: Tesla has a service problem, and it needs to get addressed as soon as possible
Just recently, Tesla CEO Elon Musk was reminded of the fact that the company needs to expand its network of physical service centers. This is a point that needs to be highlighted these days, especially as Tesla’s vehicle production and deliveries reach new records. With Tesla poised to start producing vehicles by the millions in the near future, it is time for the company to acknowledge its service issues and ensure that its service network expansion sees the same level of dedication as its Supercharger Network ramp.
Tesla may be evolving into a robotics and AI company, but at the end of the day, it is also an electric car maker. And while EVs require far less service than their combustion engine-powered counterparts, they still need service and maintenance from time to time. This is especially true in cases of physical repairs such as the replacement of upper control arms, which are better suited for actual service centers.
It should be noted that while Tesla’s mobile service team is excellent and universally appreciated, they cannot address every single concern and repair. This could become a pain point for owners today, especially those who require repairs and maintenance that could not be accomplished by the mobile service team. Some Tesla owners have shared on social media that at times, they could end up traveling for hours just to get to the nearest service center. This system creates a negative ownership experience that could be detrimental to Tesla in the long run.
“Good Service” is Better Than “No Service” — At Least for Now
The company, after all, is producing vehicles at a scale that would have scared the pants off EV skeptics just a handful of years ago. Tesla will likely produce and deliver over a million vehicles per year within the next year or two, and by that time, the repair and maintenance needs of customers would likely be more substantial. A good portion of the company’s fleet would also be comprised of older vehicles then, some of which would likely require more maintenance and repairs.
The issue of the company’s lack of service centers has been brought up in past earnings calls, and most of the time, Tesla’s executives would respond by pointing to the growth of the company’s mobile service network, which could address an increasing number of repairs and issues from the comfort of owners’ homes or workplaces. Tesla also adopts the idea of the “best service” being “no service” at all. These goals would likely be attained in the future — especially as its factories become more automated and batteries become more advanced — but for now, Tesla has to focus on ensuring that existing customers, both new and old, are supported in the near-term.
Granted, the margin of error for physical service centers is substantial. There is a big human factor that determines if customers are provided a negative or positive experience during a service center visit, after all. This was highlighted recently by @JeffTutorials, the Model 3 owner Elon Musk recently responded to on Twitter, who reported that his experience with the company’s Princeton, NJ Tesla Service Center was nothing short of horrible due to the site’s staff. Such negative experiences could be prevented, however, provided that Tesla adopts strict policies for its service employees.
A $360 Billion Upside
Ultimately, there seems to be little downside to Tesla ramping its service centers at a similar pace as its Supercharger Network, which is already one of, if not the, best rapid charging system in the world. Apart from improving its customers’ overall ownership experience, expanding its service network would also allow Tesla to tap into a large, lucrative market. In Europe, for example, Tesla could breach the company car segment, which is worth $360 billion annually. Company cars are huge in Europe, with 60% of all new vehicle sales being made through corporate channels.
SAP SE, a German software maker and one of Europe’s largest tech companies, noted back in May that its employees are actually very interested in Tesla’s electric cars. And while it provides vehicles to its workers, SAP SE simply cannot commit to Teslas just yet because of the company’s poor service center network in the region. The same was true for chemicals giant BASF SE, which noted that it could not offer Teslas as a company car option for its 50,000 German employees until service centers are expanded.
It’s important to note is that improving service is not an “either/or” situation. Yes, mobile service could be ramped to address an increasing number of issues, but the company could also expand its physical service centers at the same time, and just as aggressively. Fortunately, Tesla does seem to have this in its plans, as confirmed by Elon Musk on Twitter. And if Tesla is indeed expediting its service center openings, then the company would effectively address one of its customers’ most persistent pain points.
Plus, in the long-term, wouldn’t service centers be a good site for Tesla Bots to practice their physical work capabilities?
Don’t hesitate to contact us with account tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
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
