Tesla Motors Loses Appeal Against BBC's Top Gear

TrueSatan writes "In a highly detailed decision, the UK Court of Appeal has rejected Tesla's appeal against an eartlier ruling by a lower court that, too, rejected Tesla's case. Reading through the decision it is clear that the judge saw Tesla's case as lacking sufficient detail and specific instances of proof to support each claim. The judge stated that that Tesla's chances of a successful appeal, should the case have gone to trial, were insufficiently high to justify holding a trial. He stated that Tesla's case had no real chance of success and in many notes picked appart Tesla's legal team's arguments. That said, he did not say that Top Gear were right or justified in portraying Tesla's vehicle in the way they did — merely that there wasn't a legal case for an appeal. One of the key flaws in Tesla's case, according to the judicial decision, was Tesla's inability to show that actual pecuniary harm, with detailed financial figures, had occurred."

Re:Exaggerations

[Psyborgue]

They didn't have a valid point. The car did not run out of power. The show portrayed the car begin pushed, as i if it actually had. That may not have been an explicit lie (i mean, you can push a car that's full of gas, too), but it sure as shit is a misleading, asshole move. The car, fully charged, will get you over 300 miles, as I understand it, though less so at very high speeds. It can fast charge in an hour or so to 80%, which isn't so bad, even long distance. In a pinch you can charge it off a regular power outlet, though that takes a lot longer. The point being that unless you're trying very hard and ignoring the car's very clear warnings, it will not leave you stranded any more than a gas car will.

Re:Irrelevant

[LordLimecat]

RIAA has never to my knowledge filed a libel suit. Their suits are about copyright infringement, which is neither the same thing nor relevant to the conversation.

Re:Time to read the NYT review

[DrXym]

Tesla enabled logging in the car and it more than confirms their version of events. Given how some journalist's have it in for Tesla this seems like a sensible move by them. The journo was lying through his teeth and was caught in his lie.

Re:Exaggerations

[HornWumpus]

Anybody who buys a 'track day car'. Top Gear was evaluating the Roadster as a 'track day car'. It was right in the introduction. Did you watch the show or get all your information from Tesla's shysters?

Re:My god. Try visting reality.

[jxander]

To be fair, Top Gear still is about cars... just not about fair an unbiased bench marking. And as far as I know, that's the way it's always been. Not like they used to be a reliable source for carefully researched data, then switched to something completely different.

They'd just rather see if it's possible to peel out in a Tesla, rather than clock it's median driving distance under optimal conditions. Or see how fast you have to be going to roll a Robin Reliant. Speaking of rolling cars, has Michael Gambon been back recently?

Re:Tesla need to stop being such girls

[PhotoJim]

Anyone who has watched more than half an episode of Top Gear knows exactly what Top Gear is. It's something, and it's interesting, and it's highly entertaining, but you certainly wouldn't use it as a major contribution to your vehicle purchase decision unless you're into supercars (in which case you probably could).

The review of the Ford Fiesta was a perfect case in point. The car was tested in a shopping mall on marble floors, and in an amphibious landing with the Royal Navy.