I completely agree Tesla cheaped out on this part, I just wasn't convinced they are responsible for fixing it. I'm still not sure this justifies a class action lawsuit (I don't really feel strongly one way or the other), but I at least understand why Tesla might be held accountable for their actions.
You're talking about whether or not people should be upset. I'm talking about whether or not Tesla is legally responsible. These are orthogonal topics.
Yes, people should be upset with Tesla for a shitty design. I don't think anyone is arguing that. I don't think that automatically means Tesla should get sued for it.
Then again, I've never tried to sue an automaker. So maybe I'm just ignorant of how this is supposed to work.
But if Tesla cheaps out on critical items, thus dooming a car to that scenario, and a consumer can’t know that, it introduces a different legal dynamic.
(Disclaimer: IANAL.)
Because us tech people have been successful at hand-waving away product defects as mere planned obsolesce; we think about it as an option less and less. Point: Intel and all of the speculative execution crap, and specifically TSX (or the lack there of... but marketed as "Secure!" regardless).
Yeah it pisses me off. If you make an under-delivering pile of shit and make no attempt to right the wrong, fuck you and your company.
So for a variety of reasons, I'd argue they have a moral responsibility to fix it, INAL, so it's unknown to me if they have a legal or regulatory responsibility too.
Depends on the regulatory environment. In the main though people can expect cars to last for a good long while with maintenance, so a part that was guaranteed to fail well before then no matter how good care the consumer took of it would be a regulatory no no.