Weird, did not mean to do that and not something I've ever seen from Bloomberg before. Hopefully admins can fix if it gets traction. Appreciate the archive link.
> The father, James Riley, alleged in a lawsuit that Tesla was negligent for removing a speed-limiting device from the car after his wife had asked for it to be installed. The after-market device was designed to cap the car’s speed at 85 mph.
> The family also argued that Barrett could have survived the impact of the crash but lost his life because of the intense fire, which the suit attributes to a defective design in the battery.
> “We very much look forward to proceeding to trial in this important case against Tesla,” said Curtis Miner, an attorney representing the Rileys. Tesla’s attorney, Wendy Lumish, didn’t respond to requests for comment.
> In its defense, the company said the speed limiter was removed on Barrett Riley’s instructions when he came to the Tesla shop where the car was being serviced.
> Tesla also argued that fires aren’t uncommon when cars crash and that the Rileys haven’t offered proof that a defect was to blame for their car catching fire.
Tesla takes responsibility for nothing. Typical and unsurprising, but that doesn't make it right.
The parents even tried to put a limiter but technicians removed it at the teenager's request. Sounds quite negligent to me.
Regarding the fires, did $TSLA design the batteries to explode in the event of an accident? If not, it sounds pretty defective and unsafe to me, especially relative to ICE cars which never have fires comparable to electric cars.
I know my ebike battery has a design where the batteries are all epoxied inside an enclosure with thick, structural walls. Even with tremendous impact, nothing in the batter pack will move. Why aren't the big boy e-car manufactures taking similar precautions?
p.s. Op, why'd you link to the tos page? Forces everyone to prove they're human.