• snooggums
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    The manager told Raddon that his situation wouldn’t likely warrant an unforeseen circumstance that would trigger Tesla’s re-purchase of the truck, and reminded him that he signed a Tesla Vehicle Order Agreement which states if a Cybertruck owner sells the EV during the first year, they can be fined $50,000 and be banned from buying future Teslas. According to Business Insider:

    This seems sketchy, but then again companies apparently just get to do what they want as long as they can afford enough lawyers.

    Raddon told BI that he’s a rule-follower and he doesn’t plan to go against Tesla’s verdict on the matter or hire a lawyer to dispute the decision.

    Hahaha!

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      20 days ago

      omg that’s so much worse than just being a Tesla cuck… That’s like fighting to be Elon’s Bottom Bitch… These people are insane.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          Sounds like a flaw in the system that disproportionately favors the rich. Should probably do something about that.

            • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              19 days ago

              No, the fact they’re not choosing to fight while having enough money to throw at Tesla makes them a Bottom Bitch.

              The system making expensive lawsuits one of the only ways to restitution is the victim part. Please learn nuance before making smartass insults that don’t even make sense.

              • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                19 days ago

                I suppose I should expect this type of response from someone who is willing to victim-blame consumers because of the company they chose to purchase from.

                • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  19 days ago

                  Oh nonono, they aren’t a victim for buying a cybertruck. The problems with Tesla and Musk have been obvious for years by now.

                  The fact you do not understand being a responsible purchaser when spending SIX FIGURES leads me to believe you’re biased towards stupid decisions yourself. I’m sorry, but this person has made an unequivocally stupid purchase, and then doesn’t want to fight getting fucked by the rich troll…

                  If you want to die on the hill of defending someone making repeatedly poor decisions, be my guest.

        • magnetosphere@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          …and he might have alimony payments to worry about in the near future. Perhaps child support, too.

    • teft@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      19 days ago

      if a Cybertruck owner sells the EV during the first year, they can be fined $50,000

      How is that even remotely enforceable?

      • snooggums
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        19 days ago

        It may not be, but it worked on this guy though intimidation since he isn’t going to contest it.