[Oeva-list] SHOULD we let Tesla off the hook?
stevel at fern.com
Mon Jul 1 12:55:22 PDT 2013
On Mon, 1 Jul 2013, Eric Cha wrote:
>> Who answers warrenty claims?
> The manufacturer.
And if the manufacturer has no representation in the state, who do you sue
and in what jurisdiction?
>> How do you enforce state lemon laws if there is no entity in the
>> state with whom to pursue the claim?
> Failure to adhere to a state lemon law could be grounds for banning the
> vehicles in question in the state.
I think that's a stretch.. Can a state refuse to license a car that
isn't the one being complained about? On what basis? What happens if
you bring a car in from out of state.. purchased elsewhere, and try to
license it? Should a lemon claim "somewhere" stop you from licensing
your legally purchased vehicle?
>> There are a lot of "equipment" dealers who are reps for firms, handling
>> product in each territory.
> Yes, there are. But I do not see any reason why those representatives must
> NOT be an employee of the manufacturer.
So.. you are suggesting that each manufactuer have a registered agent in
each state.. That "must" be an employee of the manufactuerer? I don't
think that's true now!
>> I'd like for the state of Oregon to still have a role in the sale of
>> vehicles that run on Oregon roads.
> It still would. It's called vehicle registration and licensing. A state can
> easily punish a manufacturer by banning registration of the manufacturer's
> vehicle - which would effectively kill sales of vehicles within that state.
For the reasons I suggested above, I don't think this would pass muster
under the equal protection clauses in many state and the federal
>> I'm not sure that needs to be a brick and morter "dealership".. but I
>> think there needs to be a registered agent in the state.
> I agree, as would most customers I suspect. As does Tesla. However, I still
> see no reason why the registered agent must be some 3rd party as opposed to a
> direct part of the manufacturer...
I think either one would suffice... but you have to have "at least one"..
and permitting internet sales won't "magically" create a Tesla "entity"
There is already a problem in states that collect sales tax, with companies
dodging collection by claiming to not be "in the state" involved.
When there is no "dealer" involved in the transaction.. there is nobody
except the "owner" who has to follow up on the legalities of making
sure that a vehicle is properly registered, taxed and titled in the
state. I suspect that there will be a a flood of folks who don't follow
all the rules.
Since Tesla is located in California, California regulators would have
no problem making sure that Tesla cars conform to California regulations
with respect to air polution etc.. What would Oregon do if they, like
California wanted to pass their own laws, say about disposing of hazardous
(I really think a state by state patchwork of motor vehicle regulations is
NUTZ.. but we have it now.)
More information about the Oeva-list