Latest news with #TrinaThompson
Miami Herald
25-05-2025
- Automotive
- Miami Herald
Class-Action Lawsuit Targets Tesla Over Repair Restrictions and Odometer Practices
You paid $80,000 for a Cybertruck, hold the title, and park it in your driveway, but a single pothole can leave you pleading for help. When Reddit user u/IcerC faced a $34,013 repair bill after hitting a washed-out road, Tesla demanded $21,076 for VIN-locked parts and four months of downtime to fix its stainless steel "tank." The kicker? Insurance covered the cost, but the real damage was exposed: ownership dies when corporations control the parts, labor, and timeline of repairs. Tesla's repair monopoly doesn't just cost owners money; it undermines their control over their own vehicles. Tesla's proprietary software locks basic functions like air suspension calibration behind digital gates that only its technicians can bypass. VIN-locked components turn salvaged parts into paperweights when remotely disabled. Warranty policies allegedly discourage third-party repairs through restrictive practices, despite federal protections under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. The "Odometergate" lawsuit exposes systemic manipulation. Tesla allegedly inflates odometer readings using energy-consumption algorithms rather than actual mileage. One Model Y owner faced a $10,000 suspension repair bill after his warranty expired prematurely, as claimed in court filings. This built-in failure keeps drivers stuck in an unavoidable cycle: owners race to Tesla service centers before coverage lapses, only to face denied claims for prior repairs. Legacy automakers prove EV complexity doesn't require repair tyranny. Ford's F-150 Lightning provides independent shops with diagnostic access through standard OBD-II ports. GM's Ultium platform uses modular components priced 40% below Tesla's proprietary parts. The financial toll is undeniable. Tesla's parts and labor reportedly exceed competitors' prices by up to 66%, with wait times for restricted parts stretching months. A Model 3 cabin heater replacement runs $920 versus $320 for a comparable Chevrolet Bolt unit. Tesla's services revenue for 2024 was $10.5 billion, 9% of total earnings, growing 26% every year precisely because of this racket. With this kind of profit center built into the business model, it's clear how Tesla's meme stock came to be: the books are cooked against the consumer. U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson has given the go-ahead for a class-action suit accusing Tesla of antitrust violations by "tying" essential repair parts and software to its own service network. If successful, the case could force Tesla to open its parts catalog and diagnostic tools to independent shops-something drivers say would cut repair bills and shorten wait times. For now, anyone facing a six-figure repair estimate will be watching this decision closely: it could reshape how and where Tesla owners get their vehicles fixed. At the end of the day, owning an EV shouldn't mean signing up for a lifelong subscription to the manufacturer's repair department. When a single software-locked component can cost more than a year's worth of car payments, it's time to ask whether you truly own your truck or simply rent it from the factory. If you value affordable repairs and faster turnaround, consider models that support third-party maintenance and offer standard OBD-II access. The right to fix your own car is the clearest test of ownership. No fine print. No strings attached. Read the full article here Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Reuters
05-03-2025
- Business
- Reuters
Intel defeats shareholder lawsuit over foundry losses, $32 billion plunge
March 5 (Reuters) - Intel (INTC.O), opens new tab won the dismissal of a shareholder lawsuit accusing the chipmaker of fraudulently concealing problems in its foundry business, leading to job cuts and a dividend suspension that wiped out more than $32 billion of market value in one day. In a decision made public on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson in San Francisco rejected claims that Intel took too long to reveal a $7 billion fiscal 2023 operating loss linked to its business of making chips for outside customers. Intel did not disclose the loss until last April, when it made changes to how it reported financial results. But the judge said shareholders incorrectly attributed the $7 billion loss to the Intel Foundry Services business unit, and were not misled into believing the unit's reported results "included results for the entire Internal Foundry Model." Thompson also said statements last March by former Chief Executive Patrick Gelsinger that Intel was enjoying "significant traction" and "growing demand for our foundry offering" were not misleading because they concerned specific customers rather than overall revenue, which was falling. Lawyers for the shareholders did not immediately respond on Wednesday to a request for comment. Intel declined to comment. Thompson said the plaintiffs may file an amended complaint. The lawsuit accused Intel of inflating its stock price from January 25 to August 1, 2024, when Intel posted a $1.61 billion quarterly loss and said it would lay off, opens new tab more than 15,000 people and suspend its dividend to help save $10 billion in 2025. Intel's share price fell 26% the next day, resulting in the $32 billion loss of market value. The Santa Clara, California-based company has struggled to fend off competition from rival chipmakers and benefit from growth in artificial intelligence. Its rivals include Nvidia (NVDA.O), opens new tab, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD.O), opens new tab, Samsung Electronics ( opens new tab and Taiwan's TSMC ( opens new tab. Intel ousted Gelsinger in December. The case is In re Intel Corp Securities Litigation, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 24-02683.
