It was reported that two brothers from Santa Barbara, California filed a lawsuit against Tesla, claiming that the company had falsely promoted the Autopilot function of the vehicle. Subsequently, the electric car manufacturer repeatedly tried to get the court to dismiss the lawsuit, but in the end the judge announced that it would allow the case to enter the next stage.
Judge Thomas Anderle ruled earlier this week that Alexandro Filippini v. Tesla will be allowed to proceed. If an out-of-court settlement cannot be reached, The jury may listen to opinions. In 2020, the case was submitted to the California Supreme Court. Philippine and his brother Iaian claimed in the indictment that Tesla misrepresented the performance of a Model S electric car they purchased in 2016. Local media reported that the brothers said that Tesla told them that the car had a fully automatic driving function.
The lawsuit revealed that the brothers had asked Tesla employees about the function of the FSD kit, indicating that they wanted to use the function on their way to work. However, the Tesla sales staff did not stop the two’s intentions, and “confirmed and encouraged the plaintiff’s expectations, saying that the car can achieve this goal. The sales staff told the employees that they had not touched any control Traveled 55 miles with the device.”
Since the release of the Autopilot and FSD software packages, Tesla has always insisted that the system does not have L5 autonomous driving capabilities. When using the system, the driver still needs to concentrate, pay attention to the road conditions, and place his hands on the steering wheel. Be ready to take over control of the vehicle at all times. In 2018, Tesla launched the navigation function on Autopilot and said: Drivers need to be responsible for their vehicles and always maintain control of the vehicles.
The company has also set several thresholds. If you are not responsible If the driver does not pay attention to the road ahead, these thresholds will prevent them from continuing to use the Autopilot and FSD system. The vehicle will warn the driver. If the driver does not follow the warning, the vehicle will automatically pull over and stop, and during the next driving process, The Autopilot function will be temporarily disabled.
The Philippine brothers realized after a few days of buying the car that their car did not have fully autonomous driving capabilities. Tesla staff assured the brothers that in the next few years, the company will release updates to the Autopilot function to improve the performance of the vehicle. He also said that eventually, this car will have fully autonomous driving capabilities.
Tesla employees know that the company’s vehicles do not have L5 autonomous driving capabilities. However, employees may seem to have conveyed the message that these vehicles will eventually be able to drive fully autonomously. Judge Andrey has allowed the case to continue to be heard because the Philippine brothers have fully stated their allegations of fraud, which fully demonstrates that Tesla has violated the Consumer Legal Remeies Act (Consumer Legal Remeies Act).
According to the records of the California Superior Court of Santa Barbara County, the case number is 20CV01141 and will be handled by Judge Colleen Sterne.
