First Class Action Against Tesla's Unreal Range Readouts Disputes More than Just That

The law firm Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman is representing three Tesla owners: James Porter, Bryan Perez, and Dro Esraeili Estepanian. They all live in California, respectively, in Petaluma, Lancaster, and Palmdale. All three bought new cars, although the lawsuit initially suggests that Perez ordered a 2021 Tesla Model 3 Long Range in February 2022. It was actually a 2022 vehicle, as we learn by reading the entirety of the proposed class action.

The lawsuit accuses Tesla of inflating range with more than "rosy" estimates and the five-cycle testing procedure that informs a higher range than any vehicle can attain in real-life conditions. For the attorneys of these three customers, the company also exaggerates it by not telling buyers about charging limits.

For the battery pack to last longer, Tesla may establish a maximum charge percentage. The lawsuit suggests that it happens automatically and soon after purchase. If it is 80%, that means this is the range the owner will get most of the time if they don't manually override the limit. For the lawyers, that is the genuine range the vehicle offers, not the one Tesla promotes when selling the car or on its website.

Some companies work with buffering, which prevents the battery pack from reaching its maximum charging capacity every time. I have no information if more conservative automakers allow their cars to be regularly charged 100%. If they do, the buffering means they will never truly reach that maximum capacity, which may be enough to protect the expensive component without restricting how far the driver can go with their battery electric vehicle (BEV) even more.

The lawsuit accuses Tesla of not being clear about these practices. While it promises some ranges on its website, the EPA sticker they present comes with some messages that make it clear the maximum range is something that is only attainable "when the vehicle is fully charged." The sticker also informs that "actual results will vary for many reasons including driving conditions and how the vehicle was driven, maintained, or modified." That's standard language in EPA stickers for BEVs. What the attorneys classify as false advertising is that Tesla does not take the same precautions on its page and sales materials.

The customers' lawyers said that establishing a "Diversion Team" for these range complaints is a warranty breach, mainly after it started trying to convince owners to cancel without remotely checking the battery pack. They also said that Tesla's false advertisement convinced the plaintiffs to purchase the company's BEVs when they could have chosen something else or paid less for vehicles with lower ranges than the American BEV maker promised.

All three plaintiffs got disappointed with how far they could travel right from the start. Porter's 2022 Tesla Model Y Performance allegedly had a 303-mile range. After driving with a fully charged battery pack for 92 miles, he lost 182 miles of range. Perez's Model 3 was also charged to 100% capacity and driven 90 miles to his parents' house. When he returned from his 180-mile round trip, the car had only 10% of the 333-mile range left. That means he drove 180 miles and lost 283 miles. Finally, Estepanian charged his 2022 Tesla Model 3 Long Range to 90%. That gave him 299 miles of range. As he drives 140 to 150 miles per day, he should have 150 miles of range left, but his car showed only 100 miles.

These unhappy customers complained to Tesla and were just told their cars had nothing wrong with them – something the company's customers joke about by saying they are "within specs." All of them would have allegedly considered other cars if they knew their Teslas did not deliver what they promised. Hence, they decided to sue the company on behalf of all Tesla owners in California. It is not clear why they did not try to represent them all over the US. They claim the BEV maker breached express and implied warranties, violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, and committed fraud, among other accusations. The lawsuit wants the court to recognize this is a class action and that it should be judged a jury trial, but it was not specific in its prayer for relief. It will be up to the jury or the judge to decide the best compensation for that.

In Germany, these customers could ask for a buyback, a possibility that showed Tesla either overestimates its vehicles' lifespan when it wants to sell them or underestimates them for judges in such trials. As they have been driven, Tesla gets compensation for that use. While Elon Musk suggested Tesla vehicles could last between 300,000 and 500,000 miles, its German lawyers claim they will die with around 130,000 miles. The shorter the lifespan, the higher the compensation. Instead of wanting more money from unhappy customers, the American BEV maker could try a more effective strategy: pleasing its buyers so much that they do not wish to return their vehicles. Overpromising and underdelivering will not help fix that.