Tesla Accidentally Revealed High Failure Rate In Defending Itself From Reuters

In a recent clash with Reuters, Tesla has vigorously defended itself against what it calls a “wildly misleading” article while inadvertently unveiling a significant safety concern that some argue should have prompted a proactive recall.

The Reuters article, which accused Tesla of blaming drivers for the failures of known defective parts, was vehemently denounced by the electric vehicle giant. Tesla emphasized the misleading nature of the headline, asserting that the piece contained incomplete and demonstrably incorrect information. The company highlighted that customer retention is robust and among the highest in the industry, contrary to the article’s suggestion of widespread dissatisfaction.

“This latest piece vaguely and nonsensically suggests there are thousands upon thousands of disgruntled Tesla customers. It’s nonsensical because it’s nonfactual—the reality is Tesla’s customer retention is among the best and highest in the industry,” Tesla said in an X post.

One major revelation from Tesla’s response however was the disclosure that it had paid for most of the 120,000 vehicle repairs under warranty, exposing a potential safety issue. The company clarified that a customer photo used in the article represented a post-crash component damaged during an impact, with the repair not covered by warranty due to the crash’s involvement—an exclusion common in most manufacturer warranties.

Tesla defended its advanced telemetry system, citing its ability to identify emerging issues and facilitate faster improvements. The company asserted its commitment to taking prompt action on safety concerns, a practice praised by regulators for its safety advantages.

However, critics seized on Tesla’s inadvertent revelation, noting that the repair of 120,000 vehicles under warranty implies at least a 2.5% failure rate of a safety-critical component. The figures could be even higher, exceeding 5.6% if limited to the U.S. market. Observers questioned the absence of a proactive recall for the potentially affected millions of vehicles, except in China where it was mandated.

Tesla’s response included principles emphasizing efficient service and employee incentives not tied to profit from repairs. The company emphasized its commitment to making the safest cars and facilitating the transition to sustainable energy.

Despite Tesla’s defense, critics questioned the company’s transparency, pointing out that the repair revelation raises concerns about safety and the need for a recall. The juxtaposition of repair figures with the absence of a recall, except when compelled in China, drew further scrutiny.

Concerns were also raised about Tesla’s insurance rates, with reports suggesting proposed rate increases of over 15% for 90% of policyholders in Texas. This led to renewed questions about Tesla’s claims of being a superior insurance provider.

Information for this briefing was found via the sources mentioned. The author has no securities or affiliations related to this organization. Not a recommendation to buy or sell. Always do additional research and consult a professional before purchasing a security. The author holds no licenses.

Leave a Reply