2025 Tesla Model 3 Body & Structure Problems

Tesla’s Obstruction of Repairs Tesla deleted my original service complaint and annotations regarding these delivery defects. The associated service appointment was cancelled without notice or rescheduling. No repairs were performed despite the issues being raised during the warranty period. This prevented reasonable repair attempts and allowed the defects to persist. Current Nonconformities and Repair History The same or substantially similar defects continue and have worsened: • Recurring misalignment/alignment issues from delivery, impairing value and potentially safety. • Safety-related camera system failures: Persistent error codes on the camera(s) [specify if known, e.g., front/rear/ADAS-related], reducing visibility and affecting safe operation (e.g., backup, navigation, Autopilot/FSD if equipped). These are known Tesla issues potentially subject to recall (e.g., rearview camera display loss). • Power windows failure: Unresolved for at least 2 weeks despite service request; windows do not operate properly, impairing use and safety (e.g., emergency egress). Cumulative out-of-service time and failed repair attempts (including the obstructed initial one) meet or approach presumptions under § 1793.22(b): multiple attempts for the same nonconformities, with safety impacts. The vehicle remains nonconforming despite reasonable opportunity for Tesla to repair. nonconformities in the above vehicle that qualify it as a “lemon” under California Civil Code §§ 1793.2(d) and 1793.22 (Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act). These defects originated at delivery, were reported within the express warranty period, but Tesla failed to repair them—by deleting my original service complaint, annotating delivery issues without resolution, and cancelling the associated appointment—preventing conformity to warranty. The same issues persist and recur post-warranty expiration, substantially impairing the vehicle’s use, value, and safety

The contact owns a 2025 Tesla Model 3. The contact stated that after inspecting the vehicle, the contact became aware that the turn signal buttons on the steering wheel used to activate the turn signals were designed with a flaw that might cause an accident if depressed intentionally. The contact was a retired Service Technician for over 40 years. The local dealer was not contacted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure.

While driving at highway speed, the air conditioning system suddenly failed without warning. The system began blowing hot air and making a loud squealing noise. Shortly after, the vehicle abruptly went into limp mode and lost normal driving power, creating an unsafe situation on a major highway. The vehicle was towed by Tesla Roadside Assistance. Both roadside associates inspected the vehicle at the scene and confirmed there was no body damage. The vehicle was then transported to a Tesla service center, where Tesla later claimed there was body damage and denied warranty coverage. This contradicts the inspection at the time of failure and my own video evidence. The problem has not been repaired. The vehicle remains at the service center and is available for inspection. The failure put my safety at risk by causing sudden loss of drivability in highway traffic. No warning lamps or error messages appeared before the failure. The only symptoms were sudden AC failure followed minutes later by limp mode.

On April 23, 2025, at approximately 8:15 PM, I activated Tesla's Smart Summon feature to retrieve my vehicle from a parking spot. While operating autonomously under Smart Summon, the vehicle failed to detect a pole in the parking area and drove into it, causing approximately $11,000 in damage to the vehicle. I was not inside or manually controlling the vehicle at the time. The vehicle's autonomous driving software failed to identify and avoid a stationary obstacle.