Companies like Tesla link their products to agreements that force the consumer to repair their products only with official suppliers, having to pay more.
The most modern cars, especially electric ones, are equipped with numerous electronic devices and systems that work with software, but, far from offering advantages (which also), they can become a headache for consumers. One example is the way Tesla forces you to keep paying for a car you’ve already bought.
It is a trend that not only occurs with companies like Elon Musk’s, but in many more, especially technology ones. As the number of such devices increases, manufacturers are exercising more control over their products, even after the customer has taken them home.
In some cases, companies force the customer to use their repair services, rendering the product useless if they try to fix it themselves, as published by Business Insider Spain. In other cases, they require people to pay a subscription to access the basic features of the products.
Last March, several owners sued Tesla for monopolizing the (expensive) maintenance services for their cars, since the brand forces them to do any repair at the official service, without allowing them to go to any specialized workshop.
Tesla’s formula to keep paying for a car you’ve already bought
Modern software allows manufacturers to lock down users forever. Companies are beginning to monetize this control, thanks to dystopian methods and a lack of regulation. In other words, these companies make you a user of something, but without being your property, at least in its entirety.
These companies, like Apple, but also Tesla, use a number of tactics to keep customers hooked after they have purchased a product, such as a car. One such technique is to use technical sensors to prevent unauthorized changes to the product.
In the case of Tesla, the software that equips its cars can detect and if the owner of the vehicle has installed an accessory that is not from the manufacturer itself, for example, a trailer hitch.
With a model from another brand, you can go to any specialized center to have a tow ball fitted (which you will then have to approve at the corresponding ITV), but if you have a Tesla you cannot do that, you have to necessarily install a tow ball. the brand that, by the way, are sold out.
But not only Tesla performs this type of practice. Other manufacturers, such as Mercedes and BMW, have begun to include subscription services to use certain functions of the vehicles.
Subscription services in cars
Both brands recently made headlines in some news and press in the United States, charging their customers monthly fees for better acceleration or the use of heated seats. That is, charge a customer who has already purchased the product.
Or, put another way, the customer buys the car, pays to include the heated seats, and now has to pay more to activate them.
In this way, brands use connectivity to monitor and control what the customer does. If you detect that you have done something you don’t like, for example, activate the seat heating, you can remove or deactivate all other functions.
This means that the owner does not own their car, which is also quite puzzling the fact that an outside company can control your vehicle.
Going back to Tesla, it has recently been accused of remotely revoking charging capability, fast-charging compatibility, and other issues. As a result, consumers are afraid to do something that manufacturers will dislike, knowing that they may be punished.
Pay more for what you have already paid
In summary, we find ourselves in a situation in which the owner of a Tesla is forced to continue paying once the car has been purchased, through repairs in official services and a subscription to use certain functions of his car.
It’s true that manufacturers give you the ability to agree to the terms of use before proceeding, but those documents include rules that prevent people from fixing their products or allow the company to repossess ownership if they don’t approve of customer use.
The problem is that these terms and conditions of use are very dense and are written with complicated legal jargon, which makes it difficult for the user to read them. In fact, a survey conducted by Deloitte with 2,000 users in 2017 revealed that 91% accepted the terms of use without reading them.
