Judge upholds Tesla arbitration agreement that drivers called “unconscionable”
Madison_rogue@kbin.social to 
arstechnica.com
Four Tesla drivers who sued the company over its allegedly deceptive "self-driving" claims will have to go to arbitration instead of pursuing a class action, a judge ruled.
You are viewing a single comment
It's a wonder that there is anyone still buying Tesla cars.
Most companies are doing this, sticking arbitration agreements in their user agreements. Most of the time it benefits them hugely since arbitration is typically much more favorable to them than court (which is already incredibly favorable to them).
Once in a while it bites them; I recall reading some company where thousands of users started going to arbitration, and that costs them cause they pay the arbitration fees. In that case they tried to weasel out of the arbitration agreement, but last I heard a judge made them stick to it, forcing them to pay arbitration fees for every user that was asking for it.
Some backup links
Uber paying arbitration fees: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/uber-loses-appeal-block-92-million-mass-arbitration-fees-2022-04-18/
GEICO nearly having to pay $5.2mil to a woman who got an std in a rented car, stating that it should be covered under the insurance policy and arbitrator agreed: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/geico-std-car-5-million-award-vacated-by-judges/
Why? Even without self-driving, it's still an electric car, and there's quite a bit demand for those nowdays which should be a good thing, right?