On December 24 last year, the female owner of the roof of the Shanghai Auto Show Station sued Tesla and Tesla Global Vice President Tao Lin for a dispute over the right to reputation, which was tried at the Beiguan District People's Court in Anyang City, Henan Province.
In August last year, Tesla counterclaimed the female owner, demanding that the female car owner compensate for the loss of the right to reputation of 5 million yuan, in this context, the female owner requested the other party to pay the moral damage compensation increased from 50,000 yuan to 500,000 yuan. On the same day, the verdict was not pronounced at trial.
On January 2, Tesla's female rights defenders revealed more about the trial content of the "right to reputation case" on the online platform.
The female owner said:
On April 19, Tesla vice president Tao Lin said in an interview, "We have proposed a lot of solutions, we definitely need to let customers approve, but if it is an unreasonable request, we have no way to meet." She does not accept vehicle testing, must insist on high compensation, we have no reason to meet. I think she's very professional and there should be (people) behind her. ”
"We can't agree to her appeal, her appeal is unreasonable, and she is not willing to cooperate with the test, she is only willing to pay high compensation, only accept high compensation."
First, the truth of the matter is that during the two long months of rights protection before the Shanghai Auto Show, after several mediations by the Market Supervision Bureau, Tesla only proposed one solution, that is, to ask me to agree to the insurance company to repair the car, Tesla helped me sell it, helped me sell it for a good price.
This kind of solution, from the beginning to the end, did not exist many of the solutions that Ms. Tao Lin said, and she did not agree with this statement.
Video
Second, Tao Lin's "unreasonable appeals" were mediated by the market supervision department after the incident, and I had given up the appeals in the appeal letter that Tesla staff asked me to write on March 6.
After that, my only biggest appeal was to hope that Tesla could provide complete data on the vehicle at the time of the incident, and at the opening of the trial, I also asked the court to investigate and ask the market supervision department for verification.
At the same time, in accordance with Article 8 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of The Rights and Interests of Consumers, consumers have the right to know the true situation of the goods they purchase or use or the services they receive. "Civil Code Law of the People's Republic of China" and "Personal Data And Information Security Protection Law" Car owners may consult or copy their personal information from information processors in accordance with law;
The above laws and regulations are also enough to show that consumers enjoy the right to know their own vehicle data, according to the above laws and regulations, I require Tesla to provide data, and the appeal to find out the truth of the accident is legal and reasonable.
However, Ms. Tao Lin, vice president of Tesla, ignored China's laws and regulations, saying that there was no reason to meet! And frame my appeal for being unreasonable!
Third, Ms. Tao Lin said that I was no longer willing to cooperate with the test, only accepted high compensation, very professional, because there should be someone behind it, and the negative news was provided by me. It's even more nonsense.
In fact, before the auto show incident, there have been a number of Tesla accidents reported by major state media, CCTV, Xinhua News Agency, People's Daily, Beijing, Shanghai, Hangzhou, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Nanchang, Wenzhou, all included, especially noteworthy on March 11, Hainan express media reported the brake failure incident.
The owner can not brake the car, Tesla employees to the scene simulation experiment can not stop the car, in this incident, Tesla without the consent of the owner himself, sent the vehicle to a third-party testing agency that does not have judicial qualifications for testing, and announced the front-drive version of the test report.
As we all know, Tesla has never produced a precursor version of the Model 3, and so on, which is an obvious throwing behavior, which continues to cause widespread discussion in society.
None of these publicly reported negative news has anything to do with myself, so why is all the negative news that I have provided? Tesla's false statements are nakedly infringing on my reputation.
Eight months have passed, and Ms. Tao Lin's representatives in the public trial have still not been able to produce factual evidence to the court.
On the contrary, Ms. Tao Lin's agent claimed that Ms. Tao Lin's behavior was a professional act. Is It not a violation of my personal reputation that Ms. Tao Lin has publicly published false statements to the media without any factual basis?
