Court Determines Tesla’s Autopilot is Defective for Regular Use Following Phantom Braking Incident | Carscoops

      The plaintiff in Germany is seeking either compensation or a new Tesla that is free from safety issues.

      The owner of a Model 3 has filed a lawsuit against the car manufacturer after experiencing multiple phantom braking incidents.

      The court appointed an expert to assess the Model 3, who also encountered phantom braking during testing.

      Tesla has been mandated to rectify the issues with Christoph Lindner's Model 3.

      A German court has concluded that the Autopilot system in the Tesla Model 3 is "defective" and unsuitable for "normal use" due to phantom braking problems. This marks the first instance where a court has characterized Tesla's driver-assistance system in such a manner, following years of complaints from Tesla owners globally.

      The case was brought before German courts after Christoph Lindner, a Model 3 owner, initiated legal action against the manufacturer, having faced numerous concerning phantom braking situations. He asserts that the vehicle has unpredictably applied the brakes when transitioning through tunnels, changing road surfaces, and even in the presence of larger vehicles.

      Reports indicate that as the case evolved, judges instructed an expert engineer to operate Lindner's Model 3 to confirm the presence of phantom braking issues. The engineer drove the electric vehicle for over 700 km (435 miles), predominantly on highways, while documenting the journey with two interior cameras. After experiencing multiple instances of phantom braking, the expert halted the tests due to safety concerns regarding continuing to drive on public roads. He concluded the experiment to avoid further risks.

      In one particular incident, while traveling at 140 km/h (87 mph) in the left lane of a three-lane motorway, the engineer observed the Model 3 suddenly brake, reducing speed to 96 km/h (60 mph) for no discernible reason, which forced drivers behind to take evasive action.

      The Traunstein Regional Court ruled in mid-January that the Autopilot system fails to offer the level of functionality "that a consumer of a vehicle in this price range can expect." Tesla has previously defended its Autopilot as functioning as intended, and has been ordered to fix the defective vehicle.

      The Higher Regional Court in Munich is currently overseeing the case. Lindner contends that a simple repair will not suffice, insisting on the option to withdraw from his original purchase agreement or receive a new, defect-free vehicle.