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

[suchluke]

The potential preventative fix to this issue from Lucid side could have been to identify all VINs that haven't had an update to the necessary 2.1.43 version. Then move and keep the specific images in the AWS long term S3 storage (cheap), so when required they could have been pulled and applied manually at the service center. Now it's too late. Reaquired images are gone due to OTA location change. The only viable solution now is to replace TCU. Because of 30 days clause, Lucid can either shift the cost to the owner for neglecting updates (first or second or third owner) or they can silently replace at no cost to avoid negative publicity. Should we create a poll what option folks would prefer? Just keep in mind Lucid is trying to become profitable sooner rather than later. Again infinity loop .

 

[borski]

I think the context was there's only one

“software version of doom 2.1.43”

As it's called on the Post #104.

He can miss as many versions as he wants but the only one that caused the failure to connect to the new and improved sever is the only missing one “software version of doom 2.1.43”.

Not 2, not 3, but one is enough so far!

You can miss as many as you want AFTER one “software version of doom 2.1.43” but that won't cause failure to connect until there will be a decision from Lucid to create a second one “software version of doom x xx”.

Thus, Lucid needs to come out clean that there would only one “software version of doom" or many in the future as part of a luxury car design.

I must be losing my mind. I swear I have repeated myself on this a dozen times.

He did not miss one version.

He missed 20 months of updates. Dozens of versions.

Missing 2.1.43 was not the problem.

I don’t know how to make that any more clear.

If he had only missed 2.1.43, or even a couple before that, Lucid would have updated it or replaced it without issue, as they have done for others.

I don’t understand how to be more clear.

He did not miss one version. He missed many.

Is that clear?

 

[HC_79]

I must be losing my mind. I swear I have repeated myself on this a dozen times.

He did not miss one version.

He missed 20 months of updates. Dozens of versions.

Missing 2.1.43 was not the problem.

I don’t know how to make that any more clear.

If he had only missed 2.1.43, or even a couple before that, Lucid would have updated it or replaced it without issue, as they have done for others.

I don’t understand how to be more clear.

He did not miss one version. He missed many.

Is that clear?

You’re beating a dead horse! This thing started going around and around and around in circles at probably page 4, lol!

Now at 13 pages long a media outlet picked up on it. Bravo everyone.

 

[borski]

You’re beating a dead horse! This thing started going around and around and around in circles at probably page 4, lol!

Now at 13 pages long a media outlet picked up on it. Bravo everyone.

So you’ve seen it too? I’m not crazy? I didn’t imagine that I’ve definitely said this before?

 

[levsha]

The potential preventative fix to this issue from Lucid side could have been to identify all VINs that haven't had an update to the necessary 2.1.43 version. Then move and keep the specific images in the AWS long term S3 storage (cheap), so when required they could have been pulled and applied manually at the service center. Now it's too late.

I don't think the problem is with the storage: I don't believe Lucid doesn't have old images anymore stored somewhere. Yes, they are probably not available on the OTA server anymore, but shouldn't be completely lost.
For some unknown reasons Lucid dealer decided to replace the TCU instead of just updating it over the cable, and to charge the owner for this. Maybe the module was actually broken, maybe something else - we don't know and can only speculate. Yes, we speculate because Lucid has not told anyone the reason for this decision, even the owner. And yes, our speculations may be not in favor of Lucid. I don't think anyone should feel bad about this: Lucid had all possibilities to share details at least to the owner, but decided to just stick to "you have to pay for the replacement module" without any details.

 

[Neurio]

Can't this thread go away and get locked already? The going round and round is getting ridiculous.

 

[levsha]

Can't this thread go away and get locked already? The going round and round is getting ridiculous.

View attachment 24498

I don't understand: can't people who don't like some threads just stop watching them? Or does any thread that contains something negative about Lucid have to be locked? Does this thread break any policy?

 

[Neurio]

I don't understand: can't people who don't like some threads just stop watching them? Or does any thread that contains something negative about Lucid have to be locked? Does this thread break any policy?

Of course, it can be ignored. But the point has been belabored for 13 pages. Nothing new has been added for at least the last 10. It's better to just put it out to pasture. Going round and round over and over is just ridiculous.

 

[RM-S8]

Does this thread break any policy?

Not necessarily. You with your "very informative posts" are breaking my balls. Therefore, you are the first one who I'll block. Congrats.

 

[bikeriderbryan]

I must be losing my mind. I swear I have repeated myself on this a dozen times.

He did not miss one version.

He missed 20 months of updates. Dozens of versions.

Missing 2.1.43 was not the problem.

I don’t know how to make that any more clear.

If he had only missed 2.1.43, or even a couple before that, Lucid would have updated it or replaced it without issue, as they have done for others.

I don’t understand how to be more clear.

He did not miss one version. He missed many.

Is that clear?

Serious question. How do you know this? Do you work for Lucid? Are these facts from Lucid or just what you believe without Lucid saying it is true?

If this is true it would be good for Lucid to specify how many versions that can be missed before the owner has to pay. This would solve all questions.

 

[joec]

I don't understand: can't people who don't like some threads just stop watching them? Or does any thread that contains something negative about Lucid have to be locked? Does this thread break any policy?

Enough of this victim nonsense.

The vast majority of threads on this forum are negative about Lucid. A very small minority get locked.

They don’t get locked because they are negative. They get locked because people just have to be last word freaks.

Social interactions work a heck of a lot better when people listen to each other, instead of talking over each other.

 

[Paladin732]

I must be losing my mind. I swear I have repeated myself on this a dozen times.

He did not miss one version.

He missed 20 months of updates. Dozens of versions.

Missing 2.1.43 was not the problem.

I don’t know how to make that any more clear.

If he had only missed 2.1.43, or even a couple before that, Lucid would have updated it or replaced it without issue, as they have done for others.

I don’t understand how to be more clear.

He did not miss one version. He missed many.

Is that clear?

It’s been awhile since I was last on these forums, as I don’t have my Lucid anymore.

However, someone sent me this and suggested I look at it given the trouble I had with Lucid in the past.

The simple point that people seem to be missing is that Lucid could have made this user very aware of the issue when the registered their account.

I do agree voiding warranty for a missed update should be possible, but that should only be after nagging the hell out of the user:

- start killing online services
- giant banner on dash warning of warranty failure
- emails
- etc

From the bit of this thread I’ve glanced at: the car never even told them they were missing the update.

My advice: small claims court to get Lucid to honor the warranty and replace the part.

 

[HC_79]

This incident appeared to be a single occurrence, and everyone jumped on the bandwagon with speculation and demanding answers from Lucid. It’s none of our business and should be between Lucid and the original poster.

However, everyone’s actions have exacerbated the situation. The drama surrounding this single incident has attracted the attention of a media outlet. This is the problem we see in the online world today: one incident, not 100, 1,000, or 10,000, and everyone just piles on.

 

[Adnillien]

Serious question. How do you know this? Do you work for Lucid? Are these facts from Lucid or just what you believe without Lucid saying it is true?

If this is true it would be good for Lucid to specify how many versions that can be missed before the owner has to pay. This would solve all questions.

Scroll back up to this post and see for yourself. The OP posted this:

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

Oct 31, 2024

No, but anyone buying an EV must check it is current on updates, much like getting an ICE car inspected or checking the health of the battery. Sure, you don’t need to check the oil, but you do have to check the software.

Because EVs are new, however, that is not inherently obvious to anyone that is used to ICE cars, so I do get it. But it isn’t up to the buyer to update the car; it’s up to the buyer to ensure the seller does, because if it can’t, that’s still the seller’s problem, same as any other issue. Once you’ve bought the car, it’s yours: problems, warts, and all.

Except I...

• rking0122

• 
• 

 

[levsha]

This incident appeared to be a single occurrence ...

1) We don't know is that the single occurrence or one of several
2) The single occurrence may not mean much for the company, but means a lot for the victim
3) If this is just "a single occurrence" it's every bigger question why the company decided to punish the person in this case

 

[RM-S8]

FFS, I'm repeating myself,
Mods, please lock this thread down.
Please!

 

[momo3605]

FFS, I'm repeating myself,
Mods, please lock this thread down.
Please!

I thought you blocked that guy? I would suggest ignoring the thread if you’re getting so irritated

 

[RM-S8]

I thought you blocked that guy? I would suggest ignoring the thread if you’re getting so irritated

I didn't block @borski, i like him.
I blocked a real douchbag instead.

 

[AirDoll]

1) We don't know is that the single occurrence or one of several
2) The single occurrence may not mean much for the company, but means a lot for the victim
3) If this is just "a single occurrence" it's every bigger question why the company decided to punish the person in this case

This all sounds way too dramatic. There is no crime, so there is no victim. No one is being punished. Your first words were spot on “We don’t know”.

Everyone reading this post (all 13 or so pages so far) isn’t in the scenario. At all. Except the OP and Lucid. All we know is what they typed. Could be 100% true, or could be a misunderstanding, or just incorrect altogether. None of us were there, none of us have seen the car, or were there for the actual conversation. For all we know it’s handled already, or at the very least is in the process of being handled.

The OP only asked if anyone had heard of this before. No one said they had, only added assumptions, conspiracies, and threats of varying degrees.

A simple “no, that hasn’t happened to me but please update us and I hope it gets resolved soon” would have been sufficient.

FWIW I’m not insinuating the OP was lying.

I despise the bandwagon of negativity and telling Lucid how they should run their business. It’s ridiculous.

 

[rking0122]

I never would have guessed there’d be this much attention on this. I really just thought it was silly that service couldn’t physically update my hardware and I came here to ask if anyone else had been through this.

The Carbuzz article is candidly misleading, but everything is clickbait anymore... I missed lots of updates, some before and some after the one that apparently mattered.

Status for those who’ve asked:

I’m happy to report that yesterday my car finally found itself on 2.5.0 after about 11 days in service. (I can see it in the app.). Customer care has reached out to me and says they will again, but TBH, whatever. I’m not super happy how it’s been handled, but, again, whatever. Whatever happens, happens.

The loaner is nice, but I just want my car back and not to think about this any longer. I have a feeling with the new SSP updates and the speaker (butyl) tape fix I’ll quickly fall in love again for the same reasons I did in the first place.