A Tesla owner purchased a Tesla vehicle with free unlimited supercharging. When he was charged for idling time from Tesla, he points out that he is supposed to get free charging and shouldn’t be charged. However, the free charging services by Tesla are only valid till the car is charged and not when the car is already charged. Interestingly Tesla received unexpected support from CNBC.
Kevin Shenkman is the Tesla owner who files the lawsuit. With this, he wants to represent other Tesla adopters who have opted for unlimited supercharging as well. He is asking to be compensated for the earlier idling charges and to have such charges in the future to be removed. It was a big move to represent the community, but a bad one because not all other users agree with him.
Tesla owners’ community is not just about having an electric Sedan. But supporting sustainable products, and reduce carbon emissions. Which would mean that idling around the charging after charging is not really acceptable. If a person were to idle around, charging them would make sure they don’t waste time and let other users charge.
Besides, these extra charges are mostly caused when there is a line and others are waiting for their cars to be charged. It is perfectly reasonable to charge despite providing unlimited free supercharging. Because Tesla doesn’t include idling charges in the unlimited charging services. This is why this lawsuit gained a lot of attention.
Ridiculous lawsuit
Every unlimited service has its own limitations, no company is all about providing free charges just like that. Below is a tweet where @WholeMarsBlog asks the Tesla online community for their opinions. Clearly, the lawsuit seems to be a way to get attention. Some claim that he is representing himself, as a Linkedin profile shows Kevin Shenkman is a lawyer.
As an Owner who has a vehicle with FLSC, I fully understand that Idle fees are not related to charging and that if I leave my Vehicle past the time in which idle fees are imposed, that I am under obligation to pay those fees, as they are not related to charging the vehicle.
— John Edward Garcia (@JohnEG78) June 27, 2021
Furthermore, the CNBC host said, “Can we back that up for a second? One guy wants to sue them because they are breaking their promise for free charging for life because you get a fine if you leave it there for too long? Talk about a crank. Move your car so somebody else can charge it. I can’t believe we’re doing a headline on this.”
On Tesla’s website, we can clearly view “idling fee charges”, somehow the lawyer who filed the lawsuit doesn’t get along. “Representing the adopters” was a rather useless move. The fee is not really for the extra charge, but the parking fee, because they have unlimited charging services, not parking services.
