Car will not update. Lucid says needs new telematics module not covered by warranty. Is this normal?

[tonybot]

I checked my email but I don’t have the invoice saved. I’ll ask them to email me next time I take it for service for cabin air filter. But I found this where they tried to charge me $107 for safety inspection in Texas. Unreal.

Isn’t Texas state inspection capped at $25 by law?

 

[Htx lucid]

Isn’t Texas state inspection capped at $25 by law?

For electric cars it’s $7 as it’s only safely inspection. Ice vehicle is $25.50.
When I asked them for $100 misc charge they said it was labor time - for tech to drive over to state inspection machine which they didn’t have at their location. I politely ask them to please remove the charge and they did. As it’s not legal to charge anything over $25.50 for state inspection.

 

[Leftlane]

ICE cars are $7 also - I just had both of my other cars inspected to renew registrations and paid $7 each. No more inspections after this year anyway - but that is a rip by Lucid for sure.

Edit - in San Antonio we don’t have emissions test, so maybe it is different in Harris County if you do (or wherever you are).

 

[Wolfman]

Ok, this is a very interesting thread. A number of opinions as to who is responsible for making sure the software is up-to-date, if it's ok to have the warranty written as they did, etc. and the opinion of some members that it's not worth beating a dead horse.

My thoughts... If Lucid wants to be a mainstream manufacturer and compete with other well established luxury car brands like Mercedes, BMW, etc. then they better cover this under warranty and not bother people with the fine print.
The average luxury car buyer will not give a damn about software in the first place, will expect that the car stays update with minimal effort and will expect that the car is covered for everything while under warranty, apart of wear items, consumables or abuse. Even aftermarket modifications will not void warranty in general (per Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act).
In short, if the car is under warranty, it is covered. If not, it is inferior to other luxury brands.

Some in this thread seem to have unrealistic expectations as to what is required by the customer IMO, especially the scenario mentioned by the OP. It makes sense to have these diverse discussions in a car forum as they only comprise of the most dedicated car owners and enthusiasts, but ultimately only account for a tiny fraction of the customer base.

 

[bikeriderbryan]

Oh, please. Your anti-Lucid posts are starting to get tiresome. Certainly if you have something objective to add please do so, but baseless conspiracy theories will not be tolerated here.

Hmm seems like my reply was deleted

 

[bikeriderbryan]

My Air is sitting in the service center due to ongoing issues. Lucid replaced a module and afterwards I received a msg on my phone saying about a SW update. I looked at my app and it showed my car was now on SW 1.1.4. A SW update was started and after the update my car was on 2.4.10. Took about 20 mins.

 

[levsha]

My thoughts... If Lucid wants to be a mainstream manufacturer and compete with other well established luxury car brands like Mercedes, BMW, etc. then they better cover this under warranty and not bother people with the fine print.
The average luxury car buyer will not give a damn about software in the first place, will expect that the car stays update with minimal effort and will expect that the car is covered for everything while under warranty, apart of wear items, consumables or abuse. Even aftermarket modifications will not void warranty in general (per Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act).
In short, if the car is under warranty, it is covered. If not, it is inferior to other luxury brands.

And almost nobody will actively monitor an non-official forum to ensure their car is up to date. So there are several issues I see:
* the car has been always telling that it is up to date - and that probably means that communication module was broken long time ago - clearly warranty case
* the dealer decided to replace the module instead of just re-flashing it over the wire - either it's not possible (that would be significant designing defect as pointed about), the module was actually defective (but that would mean warranty case) or they just decided or only have "replacement" as the procedure (would be significant mistake in service instructions)
* the dealer decided to charge the customer quite significant amount for all of this (even though the car is on the warranty still isn't it?).
TBH it's pretty significant incident for me to think about to buy or not to buy Gravity - I'm not sure I'll be happy to wait for replacement part to be delivered oversees because the dealer decided to just replace it when I did not mistakes.

 

[Tâm]

My Air is sitting in the service center due to ongoing issues. Lucid replaced a module and afterwards I received a msg on my phone saying about a SW update. I looked at my app and it showed my car was now on SW 1.1.4. A SW update was started and after the update my car was on 2.4.10. Took about 20 mins.

Amazing speed. There are dozens and dozens of versions between 1.1.4 to 2.4.10. It would take an overnight or days to OTA install them sequentially one after another!

 

[bikeriderbryan]

Amazing speed. There are dozens and dozens of versions between 1.1.4 to 2.4.10. It would take an overnight or days to OTA install them sequentially one after another!

Totally agree. All I know is I saw one update that took 20 mins. I guess the service center was working it's magic.

 

[borski]

* the car has been always telling that it is up to date - and that probably means that communication module was broken long time ago - clearly warranty case

As I’ve repeated a dozen times: you do not know that. It is just as likely that the software update did pop up, and exist for quite a long time, then stop appearing once the OTA server was killed some 20 months later.

That would mean, for the new owner, @rking0122, some very unfortunate circumstances he is facing today, but does not necessarily imply that the TCU was “broken long time ago.” If the previous owner refused or ignored updates for over a year and a half, that would not be a warranty issue.

My point isn’t that I’m right. It’s simply that we don’t know, and should thus stop assuming.

 

[rking0122]

As I’ve repeated a dozen times: you do not know that. It is just as likely that the software update did pop up, and exist for quite a long time, then stop appearing once the OTA server was killed some 20 months later.

That would mean, for the new owner, @rking0122, some very unfortunate circumstances he is facing today, but does not necessarily imply that the TCU was “broken long time ago.” If the previous owner refused or ignored updates for over a year and a half, that would not be a warranty issue.

My point isn’t that I’m right. It’s simply that we don’t know, and should thus stop assuming.

It would have taken about one line of code to prevent the car from giving a false status.

 

[Bobby]

It would have taken about one line of code to prevent the car from giving a false status.

That is a gross oversimplification. There are millions of line lines of code in the car, all of which have to comply not only with normal coding standards, but those standards set forth in the various vehicle codes of the countries in which the car is sold. It is extremely complex and requires multiple levels of validation.

 

[suchluke]

It would have taken about one line of code to prevent the car from giving a false status.

My guess is that the car only prompts for an update if it sees the VIN specific image available for that car. It was probably showing update available (considering TCU was operational) before you acquired it. Later the image was moved to deleted and car was again showing up to date since it could no longer see available image to update. This is bad design. Now the question is why does it require TCU replacement and Lucid is charging for labor and diagnostics around $700. Most likely it is easier for them to do it that way.

 

[rking0122]

That is a gross oversimplification. There are millions of line lines of code in the car, all of which have to comply not only with normal coding standards, but those standards set forth in the various vehicle codes of the countries in which the car is sold. It is extremely complex and requires multiple levels of validation.

I know it is. I just had a salty moment I think because I keep getting pushed back as to when the car will even be done.

 

[levsha]

As I’ve repeated a dozen times: you do not know that.

I don't. And you don't know either. So these both you and me do guesses here. We haven't received any information from Lucid, so we make our guesses on available information. I don't see any reasons why would I make any assumptions in favor of the company if all available information is agains, and the company hasn't provided any information at all.

It is just as likely that the software update did pop up, and exist for quite a long time, then stop appearing once the OTA server was killed some 20 months later.

So the car used to tell the driver that it is not up to date anymore, and then, when it was not able to connect to the OTA server, switched back to say "up to date"? That is clearly wrong implementation of the check in the firmware.

That would mean, for the new owner, @rking0122, some very unfortunate circumstances he is facing today, but does not necessarily imply that the TCU was “broken long time ago.” If the previous owner refused or ignored updates for over a year and a half, that would not be a warranty issue.

My point isn’t that I’m right. It’s simply that we don’t know, and should thus stop assuming.

But you are doing exactly this right now: assuming.

 

[borski]

It would have taken about one line of code to prevent the car from giving a false status.

Cool. Let's even say, for a moment, that that absurd statement is true. Forget the fact that I've been doing this for 28 years, and let's just accept that as true, for the sake of argument. Fine, you're 100% right.

How, exactly, do you think that single line of code should be delivered to the vehicle, given that they never had the forethought of having to switch OTA providers entirely? You know, since hindsight is 20/20?

It would presumably get delivered via... an OTA, yeah? The same ones that went uninstalled for 20 months?

Right.

 

[levsha]

Also if there is an important firmware update that hast to be done by some date I'd expect a premium car manufacturer to actively reach every owner whose car is not up to date after some time and tell them they need to do update, suggesting them to come to the car dealer if they can't/don't want to do this for some reasons - the same that is usually performed for recalls - I expect the car manufacturer can check at which FW version is every car.

 

[borski]

I don't. And you don't know either. So these both you and me do guesses here. We haven't received any information from Lucid, so we make our guesses on available information. I don't see any reasons why would I make any assumptions in favor of the company if all available information is agains, and the company hasn't provided any information at all.

Yup, I completely agree, 100%. However, the difference appears to be that I do not assume malice first. I assume many other things: incompetence, accident, and so forth. I have found, in my experience, that Occam's razor is rarely wrong, and the simplest explanation is that there is something we don't know that would explain this all, rather than Lucid decided to enforce a rule they haven't enforced before and dug their feet in despite the obviously bad PR here which they have obviously seen.

The latter seems more complicated of a theory to me, hence why I don't believe it as readily. But you're right, it's just a guess! And as long as we all agree these are all just guesses, I have no issue with that.

But people seem to want to start making decisions on those guesses, like "not ordering gravity" or "selling my air" or whatever, and that is what I am saying is misguided.

Guess away.

So the car used to tell the driver that it is not up to date anymore, and then, when it was not able to connect to the OTA server, switched back to say "up to date"? That is clearly wrong implementation of the check in the firmware.

Is it? There is currently no update. There is no possible way for the car to update. It does not know about a new server, and thus there is no update for it to grab and install. That seems like a perfectly fine implementation of the check in the firmware.

Why would I tell you about an OTA update you can no longer install? That would be terrible UX!

(See? These things are rarely as simple as they seem at first glance.)

But you are doing exactly this right now: assuming.

Yup. I agree.

 

[borski]

Also if there is an important firmware update that hast to be done by some date I'd expect a premium car manufacturer to actively reach every owner whose car is not up to date after some time and tell them they need to do update, suggesting them to come to the car dealer if they can't/don't want to do this for some reasons - the same that is usually performed for recalls - I expect the car manufacturer can check at which FW version is every car.

And, as far as I am aware, they did. They emailed every single owner for 2.1.43 (not the situation @rking0122 was in, but nevertheless an example).

I have been reached out to to install past firmware updates when I was on vacation and it had been a while (like 60 days), and I know multiple other owners have too.

I have no idea if they did or didn't in this case, but have no reason to assume they suddenly didn't.

 

[Buffalo Bob]

I have not been a systems analyst for 43 years, but if I recall my terms correctly, this thread seems to be stuck in an 'infinite loop'