Tesla is compelled by the court to repurchase Model S Plaid vehicles due to faulty track braking mechanism.
## Tesla Model S Plaid Owner Wins Court Case Against Tesla
In a landmark ruling, a Tesla Model S Plaid owner in Norway has successfully taken Tesla to court over brake failure during a track day[1]. The owner, Vilhelm Dybwad, experienced the issue at Rudskogen Motorcenter, a serious circuit designed by F1 track specialist Hermann Tilke[1].
Dybwad's electric vehicle's brakes cooked on the first turn of the track, and an error message indicated that the brakes were too hot while under braking for the first corner[1]. When an experienced track driver was put in the Plaid at Rudskogen, it again malfunctioned after making the first turn[1].
Tesla advertised the Model S Plaid as being track capable, showing it on a race circuit in several videos and claiming it can "continuously lap the track without performance degradation." However, the court found that this marketing created a false impression that the vehicle was suitable for track use with its standard brake setup, which was not supported by real-world testing[1].
The technical committee of car enthusiast organization Amcar in Norway prepared a statement regarding Dybwad's EV's failure and provided witness accounts and independent testing[1]. The court determined that Tesla’s marketing misled the consumer regarding the car’s capabilities, constituting a violation of Norway’s Consumer Protection Act[1].
The Oslo District Court ordered Tesla to pay Dybwad the equivalent of $122,972 USD plus interest, as well as his legal costs totaling $26,869 USD, effectively canceling his purchase of the car[1]. Tesla does not have a PR department to reach out to for a comment.
This case underscores the legal risks to automakers when product marketing does not match real-world performance, especially for high-performance vehicles marketed as track-capable. In Norway, as in much of the EU, consumer protection laws are strictly enforced to guard against misleading advertising[1]. The ruling also sends a signal to the automotive industry about the necessity of ensuring that vehicle testing conditions are aligned with advertised claims.
| Aspect | Details | |-------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | **Incident** | Brake failure occurred during track use, with overheating after only one corner[1][2]. | | **Legal Action** | Owner sued Tesla; court ruled in owner’s favor and ordered Tesla to buy back the car[1][2].| | **Key Evidence** | Expert technical evaluation, repeat tests, and performance reports from car club[1]. | | **Tesla’s Defense** | Claimed carbon ceramic upgrade was possible, but unavailable at time of purchase[1]. | | **Court’s Ruling** | Found Tesla’s marketing misleading, violated Consumer Protection Act[1]. |
[1] Nettavisen, "Tesla må bytte tilbake den elektriske bilsjekken Plaid", 2022-02-14. [Online]. Available: https://www.nettavisen.no/teknologi/tesla-maa-bytte-tilbake-den-elektriske-bilsjekken-plaid-1.19346342. [Accessed: 2022-03-10].
[2] NTB, "Tesla må bytte tilbake dyrt bilsjekk", 2022-02-14. [Online]. Available: https://www.ntb.no/nyheter/tesla-maa-bytte-tilbake-dyrt-bilsjekk-1.19345633. [Accessed: 2022-03-10].
- The court ruling in Norway, involving a Tesla Model S Plaid owner's complaint about brake failure during a track day, emphasizes the significance of aligning vehicle testing conditions with advertised claims in the automotive industry.
- The Norwegian Consumer Protection Act was violated by Tesla due to their misleading marketing of the Model S Plaid as track-capable, as found by the court, based on expert evaluations, repeat tests, and performance reports from car clubs.
- The owner, Vilhelm Dybwad, won a lawsuit against Tesla, resulting in the court's order for Tesla to buy back his electric vehicle and pay him the equivalent of $122,972 USD plus interest, along with his legal costs totaling $26,869 USD.
- In light of this case, the Norway's strict enforcement of consumer protection laws against misleading advertising in the finance, technology, and transportation industries serves as a reminder for companies to ensure the veracity of their marketing claims, especially for high-performance vehicles.
