Connect with us

News

Tesla Supercharger-blocking Ford Mustang gets towed after driver flips off Model 3 owner

Credit: Twitter/@dollarn9ne

Published

on

The owners of two Ford vehicles who parked their vehicles in Tesla Superchargers have been taught a valuable lesson: if one were to intentionally block a charging station while other EV owners are waiting to recharge their cars’ batteries, police may be involved. And when police get involved, inconveniences are very likely to happen.

Tesla Model 3 and Model X owner @dollarn9ne shared the incident on Twitter. After arriving at a Supercharger in Walnut Creek, California, he noticed that two Ford cars, a Mustang and a Focus, were parked in spaces that were specifically reserved for Tesla vehicles. The EV owner opted to ask the owner of the Mustang by telling him that the space he was parked at was reserved for Teslas. But instead of acknowledging his mistake and moving his vehicle, the Mustang driver reportedly gave the Model 3 owner a clear middle finger salute instead.

https://twitter.com/dollarn9ne/status/1208524235519381504?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1208524235519381504&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.xautoworld.com%2Fnews%2Fmustang-focus-towed-ice-ing%2F

It was at this moment that the Model 3 owner decided that it’s best to call the authorities, especially since intentionally blocking an EV charging stations can give drivers a citation. Police eventually arrived after @dollarn9ne’s call, and promptly towed both the Mustang and the Focus away. Both drivers were also given a ticket, requiring them to pay the cost of the tow. A citation for knowingly blocking an electric car charging stall was added for good measure.

Some Twitter users familiar with the Walnut Creek Supercharger stated that the spaces were “Tesla Preferred” but could be used by anyone. However, the Model 3 owner explained that the side where he was parked was “Parking for All, but Charging Preferred,” while the two Ford vehicles were in spaces that were allotted only for EVs that are charging. This was why he only called the police on the Ford vehicles, despite there being a Lexus parked beside him.

Advertisement
https://twitter.com/dollarn9ne/status/1208578467475808262?s=20

The practice known as ICE-ing, or the intentional blocking of an electric car charging stall by an ICE vehicles, is unfortunately common. That being said, some ICE owners who willingly engage in this act do receive a good dose of justice from time to time. A Ford pickup truck in Berlin, Germany was recently towed for doing the same thing. After a mass ICE-ing event during a Yorktown, New York “Cars & Coffee” meet made the rounds online, the organizers of the group also mobilized immediately to prevent such incidents from happening again in the future.

ICE-ing is an issue that can be confronted and taken care of by local authorities. Unfortunately, there have been past instances where physical damage and acts of vandalism are performed on electric vehicles and Supercharger plugs. Thanks to Tesla’s Sentry Mode, many of these perpetrators have been caught and been forced to be held accountable.

https://twitter.com/dollarn9ne/status/1208584845800034304?s=20

Other practices, like “Coal Roll” type attacks have been performed upon owners of electric vehicles as well. Recently, a Model 3 Performance owner in Miami, Florida was subjected to this attack while driving to work in the morning on the busy I-95 interstate.

The powerful movement of electric cars is notable, especially considering the variety of attacks the vehicles and their owners seem to experience. In reality, these attacks are vicious and lead to inconvenience for everyone. There is an etiquette when it comes to charging and it includes being courteous to those who drive vehicles that differ from yours. It would not be advantageous for the owner of an electric car to park at a gas pump just to inconvenience someone. In conclusion, acts like this end poorly for those who choose to knowingly be ugly to owners of electric cars.

Advertisement

H/T to Iqtidar Ali

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

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 denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

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.”

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.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

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.

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.

Continue Reading