Judge dismisses dealers' lawsuit against Tesla's retail stores

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20130104/CARNEWS/130109938

by neuralnetwork • 14 years ago

93 48 14 years ago

autoweek.com

hayksaakian• 14 years ago

What an absurd lawsuit.

loceng• 14 years ago

Not for a group trying to maintain status quo and control..

dlgeek• 14 years ago

I'm not so sure - looks like the law might very well be in their favor. (You could argue about the merits of the law, but not the lawsuit).

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXV/... - (c) It shall be deemed a violation of subsection (a) of section 3 for a manufacturer, distributor or franchisor representative:

(10) to own or operate, either directly or indirectly through any subsidiary, parent company or firm, a motor vehicle dealership located in the commonwealth of the same line make as any of the vehicles manufactured, assembled or distributed by the manufacturer or distributor.

(It goes on with a bunch of exceptions that I'm not qualified to evaluate)

WRT standing, Section 6 of the chapter, part E allows other dealerships to sue to stop the establishment of franchises (which this arguably may be) and section F specifically states that "the fact that a protesting dealer has standing shall not be considered by the court in assessing the merits of the protest;"

They may very well have a strong case.

jlgreco2• 14 years ago

An absurd law does not render an absurd lawsuit sane.

sixQuarks• 14 years ago

The wording doesn't make sense. It basically says no manufacturer can operate a dealership that's located in the "commonwealth of the same line make" - what the hell does that mean?

I interpret it as meaning no manufacturer can operate a dealership within the same territory as an existing dealership that sells the manufacturer's make.

So if that's correct, then the judge did the right thing. Since Tesla doesn't have any dealers to compete with.

tomjen3• 14 years ago

Given that the Judge threw the lawsuit out, it seems fairly difficult not to argue against it.

But even if he had not, I would still argue against it, as it shows an extreme lack of morals on the part of the francishers.

pyre• 14 years ago

  | a factory cannot own a store, and a dealer can sue
  | for injunctive relief if they feel the public is being
  | harmed.

I wonder how they feel that the public is being harmed. Seems to me more like they don't like the competition.

ok_craig• 14 years ago

Can anyone inform us on why there is such a law as "a factory cannot own a store" in the first place?

gonehome2• 14 years ago

I believe it was because it would be unfair for a factory to begin to compete with its already franchised locations.

boredguy83• 14 years ago

These laws were established in the 1930s when factories would establish franchisees in (what was to them) low-value regions. As they grew more valuable, they would move into the region with factory-owned dealerships & start gouging franchisees. Since then, lobbying power has undoubtedly extended dealership power further than what's generally beneficial. But the starting point, it seems to me, made sense.

For a fairly balanced (but not up-to-date as far as the status of legal challenges) starting point: http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/tesla-plans-short-cir...

tzaman• 14 years ago

> the public is being harmed.

Maybe the should look in the mirror?

Vivtek3• 14 years ago

Bah. Everybody always says "think of the children" when they see risk to themselves. It's just a phrase.

panacea• 14 years ago

I wonder why it's not such a potent hot-button when it comes to climate change?

Edit: "Won't somebody think about the grandchildren?" not as impacting?

biot• 14 years ago

  "We [...] look forward to following through on our
   commitment to introduce consumers to electric vehicle
   technology in an open, friendly, no-pressure environment,"
   Elon Musk, Tesla co-founder and CEO, said in the statement.

Is it no pressure because they make so few that there's a lineup of people waiting to pay full MSRP?

boredguy83• 14 years ago

The way the stores are currently set up (or: at least the one in San Diego), the employees can't sell you a car and they don't make any commission or 'referral bonus' or such. It's literally a car, a partial battery assembly frame, and some logo-ized mugs & shirts. Hence there's literally 0 pressure because nobody there can sell you a car. The gal I spoke with was very well informed (even knew the OS that ran the car's dashboard!) but wasn't even bringing up her own 'talking points' -- she gave me a cursory overview & then answered all of my questions.

modeless• 14 years ago

Don't keep us in suspense! What OS does the Tesla dashboard run?

heimidal• 14 years ago

From what I can discern (and I'm definitely not a lawyer), the judge is basically saying that only dealerships that would be in direct competition _to sell Teslas_ would have standing to sue. In other words, an existing Tesla dealership could sue, but, say, a BMW dealership cannot.

Can anyone verify that's what is going on here? Thanks!

wildranter• 14 years ago

Please release us all from all stupid regulations, and let remain the better, faster, and stronger ones.

jfb• 14 years ago

Seek that rent, car dealers!

Judge dismisses dealers' lawsuit against Tesla's retail stores

Related Stories