No, this is about the claim that representatives told customers that is normal, that their cars have lower ranges than advertised.

The allegedy cospiracy would be that Tesla managment and its employees were conspiring to quickly deal with customer complaints. But what is actually illegal there? Note that the representatives were truthful when they dismissed customers. Their cars were not broken.

Fraud is illegal. And all fraud is ... is just lying to a degree enough that the courts care.

The more-and-more it is proven that your "just lying" is a coordinated effort across your company, the more and more it looks like fraud to ... well everybody.

But the suggestion that tesla was lying seems already far fetched. If anything their adertising was misleading.

>The more-and-more it is proven that your "just lying" is a coordinated effort across your company, the more and more it looks like fraud to ... well everybody.

But there is zero evidence for this. There is no lie here. At best there are misleading statememts about performance.

Intentionally misleading people.. is exactly the definition of lying?

To be fair, "lying" isn't a legal term.

"Fraud" is a legal term, and "intentionally misleading people" is the very definition of Fraud. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fraud

In fact, it seems like Fraud is still Fraud at the reckless or negligent levels. No intent needed (though I'm sure proving it at the "intent" level will get them more of a case).

So... is this Fraud? Well, yes. It would be. But the next step is for these plaintiffs to prove the fraud in court. It seems like they have a strong argument though.

There is no fraud or misleading people. The EPA test cycle is an official test, you can run the test and get the same results yourself. It's not fraud that some dumb consumers don't understand what an EPA range estimate means

It's fraud. There's already internal leaks documenting Teslas fraud perpetrated on the insistence of Elon.

I didn't know that VW owned Tesla!