Tesla Model 3 owner catches guys replacing car parts after renting it on Turo | Hacker News Reader

Tesla Model 3 owner catches guys replacing car parts after renting it on Turo

teslaoracle.com

61 pointsCarCooler45 comments

How can a shop that sells aftermarket parts for Tesla’s not have a Tesla of their own to test them on? Seems sketchy.

Getting every model combination would require a ton of capital.

Renting one to test for a day costs only a couple hundred.

Im pretty sure there is only one Model 3 body.

If they are testing the parts to the point where they would risk dismantling a rented car, I assume these are some form of custom development - if they were just reselling they could trust the manufacturer that everything is to spec, and deal with any issues as they appear during installs?

How is this different from any other automobile repair servicer?

If they service all makes and models, they wouldn't have every make and model nearby to test. That doesn't mean they borrow other people's cars to test the parts.

Given all the information, it does sound like they were test fitting aftermarket parts.

How the hell do you do that without the owner's permission? And which owner will let that fly? Bastards need to be arrested and sued.

It's a bit underhanded, but your comment is wildly overblown.

> Bastards need to be arrested and sued.

If you're serious, this is something I can't imagine someone jumping to in many places outside of the U.S. Even if there was evidence to support damage being done or parts being stolen, neither action would be rational

I’m confused where in the world you live where someone could have potentially voided your warranty and destroyed a 50,000$ car and you wouldn’t want restitution? You would be completely fine with this situation???

You generally need something to actually happen, not ‘potentially happen’ to want restitution.

At any point when driving a car, someone could potentially destroy the damn thing or kill me. If you're renting your car out, and you assume there's zero risk, you're at best rarher naive. If you buy a 50k status symbol and need to be super precious about it, maybe you shouldn't have bought it. I'd go one step further, and suggest that if taking your bumper off and putting it back on voids your warranty, and that's important to you, maybe you shouldn't be buying what is ultimately an expensive fashion item and renting it out.

Destroyed?? That seems a bit overblown.

I assume aftermarket parts could decrease the value of the vehicle, so it would come down to what the fair market value of a Tesla that has been used as a rental car that has only OEM parts is compared to a Tesla that is similar in all other regards but has known non-oem parts installed by people of uncertain technical skill.

I would be surprised it if was more than a few hundred dollars of damages if there were any damages at all.

They vandalized a vehicle. That’s a crime.

I don’t mean to defend what this body shop was doing, but I fail to see how this could be considered vandalism absent intentional damage being done.

Body parts aren't really made to be flawlessly removed and replaced. There's probably several flaws after that happens, worn plastic connectors and holes, imperfect seams, wiring routed through panels slightly wrong, new scuffs/scratches, etc.

They intentionally removed parts of his car. Seems pretty vandalizing. And they claimed they were going to replace them.

If you came home and someone had removed the tires off your car, would you consider that vandalism? What if they said they were just testing out some other tires and would replace them?

If I rented my car to someone and they had taken off my tires and put different ones on and claimed they were testing, I would be pissed off. No, I would not consider it vandalism because words have actual meanings.

This is a rather absolutist take for something so open to interpretation. There are also lots of crimes being committed constantly, but law should be used as a social framework first and system of punishment last. People in that framework are expected to be capable of more conplex thought than "You did bad, time 4 jail". There is nuance, and law should be there to facilitate restitution if necessary, but ideally there are other avenues for resolving dispute

>system of punishment last.

The US must have missed that memo

A replacement bumper from Tesla is upwards of $2000 and would be considered felony theft.

For what? Breach of turo agreement? No damage to award

Yes, monetary damages for breach of contract, which likely doesn’t cover disassembly and any vehicle damage no matter how small that may result. Plus Compensatory damages for having to pay a Tesla shop to certify it was put back together correctly. As well punitive damages for fraud by the renter

It’s very likely the warranty is voided and there is diminished value to the car now. He could easily push a destruction of property/vandalism charge.

I don’t believe it would be legal in CA for a car manufacturer to offer a warranty that is voided by something like temporarily removing a part.

You can modify your car anyway you want and it won’t void the warranty for unaffected parts, but the bumper warranty would be void and that’s like $2000 from the quote a colleague got from Tesla for a replacement bumper and paint.

The Magnusson-Moss act prevents arbitrary voiding of warranties.

It's definitely not ok to do, but why would you arrest and sue them? What possible benefit would that provide to the owner, or society?

What if they didn't torque something right? Or made any mistakes/caused damage and then the next person who drives it ends up injured or dead? At least a large fine and probation would be appropriate.

He should take it to a mechanic and have it inspected, if anything is off he then asks him to pay to get it fixed. If he doesn’t pay, then you sue. You don’t have to jump to suing people right away, god damn.

It would make them less likely to do this again. It’s the same benefit of arresting people who smash a window or spray paint a car.

I dunno about you, but I got better things to do with my time than sue people for silly reasons. What the guy did is not right, but unless there was any damage it would be a waste of everyone’s time.

Drop it off at a mechanic and have them inspect it, if all looks good, move on with your life. Otherwise, ask them to pay, if they refuse, then sue.

> Drop it off at a mechanic and have them inspect it, if all looks good, move on with your life.

This isn’t free. So I should pay a mechanic to inspect because of their action?

If I steal your car for a day and bring it back, is that ok with you? Do you have better things to do than file a police report?

Note, I don’t think the owner needs to sue them. He just needs to have the police charge them with the crime they committed.

Yes, if someone stole my car, I would definitely file a police report. The two here aren’t equivalent. One is stealing your car, the other is someone renting your car and then using it in an unauthorized manner.

Again, it’s a shitty thing what the guy did, but I would file a complaint with Turo and try to get the money for an inspection through that.

Sure, file a police report against the guy (though I don’t think police would pursue any legal action against this guy without damages).

My problem here is the people calling for a lawsuit. Like, how is that a good use of anyone’s time?

Restitution to the owner for a potentially voided warranty and bricked car?

He removed the bumper. That doesn’t void warranty nor can it brick the car.

All what information?

Sounds like a civil matter and it would be hard to prove damages

I would think that removing parts from a car is vandalism and thus criminal.

Also the cost of having a separate shop put everything back and verify is in the thousands so likely would hit felony.

A friend had his bumper replaced and it was $10k on his Model3.

‘Interfering with a motor vehicle’. This includes theft of parts. I doubt that putting it back would be a good defence any more than if you ‘borrowed’ the entire car.

I'd be most concerned about whether this has affected anything with Tesla's warranty. Say a few years down the line you have an issue with the paint, you take it to them to repair, and they say "oh we see you had the bumper repaired by a third party, our warranty won't cover that".

> However, even if they were just testing, it was ethically, morally, and legally wrong to do so without the consent of the vehicle owner.

Aren't ethics and morals the same thing here? Also, I wonder what law was being broken, or if the author just thinks it should be illegal.

(FWIW, I do agree that it's not cool to take apart someone else's car without their consent.)

Heh, this line is probably why people who went to journalism school sneer at bloggers. Although some journalists aren't any better either.

I'm really bored so I went through the Turo terms of service[1]. It seems they violated this term:

> When you book a vehicle on the Services, you must use the vehicle only for your personal use and not for any commercial purposes (e.g. driving other passengers for a fee such as through Uber or Lyft or delivering food or other packages) unless you have express written permission from the Turo Legal Department in advance or as otherwise described here.

Also in the prohibited uses list[2] (although they seem to have messed up their list indenting at that point):

> - Prohibited vehicle uses and activities include:

> [...]

> - Making any unapproved alterations, additions, or improvements to any vehicle

[1] https://turo.com/us/en/policies/terms [2] https://help.turo.com/en_us/prohibited-uses-Hyi0E4l49

ToS is not a law.

Wonder what the Turo terms of use say over such things....

Some reddit users said this is normal?

Ok!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com