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

[sdlucid]

I think you have a strong case now. The vehicle says it's up to date. And as per you, Lucid did confirm that the warranty was up to date before purchasing the car. I would suggest reaching out to their PR folks or someone in twitter or any other medium. If nothing works, this is an interesting article for the EV-centric websites out there (InsideEvs?), it will also help as an awareness article for those who don't care much about software updates on their vehicle. I would never have thought of a clause like this for warranty. Such an attempt may help catch attention from someone at Lucid to change this warranty policy. It's quite possible that a vehicle on used car dealer lots sit for quite some time without any updates installed.

 

[skomarla]

when cars sit in inventory, i really doubt that someone is going around updating them all so that its within the warranty terms. When I took delivery, I *know* that the service center triggered the updates and there were many. Took several hours. If you have evidence that Lucid stated that the car was under warranty before purchasing, honestly, take it a lawyer. I'd say you have a case.

 

[AwesoM]

I am a reasonable person and have posted about this *specific* issue in this forum many times before. It is not absurd to expect someone to read the warranty for their vehicle.

That said, this is a case of buyer beware: it is very important, especially with EVs, to make sure the software on the car is up to date before a second hand purchase. If it isn’t, make them update it before you purchase it, for this very reason.

@HariK No. Just because this is the letter of the warranty does not mean Lucid must enforce it. Being out of town and unable to install an update, or it failing, is not an issue, provided you address it relatively promptly. Lucid has no reason to screw anyone over on purpose.

Which brings me to my next point: *technically*, Lucid could say it is no longer a warranty item because when the first owner had it they should have installed the OTAs, and instead it has sat updateless for many months, despite sending out repeated warnings.

That said, I think the right thing for Lucid to do would be to “good will” this particular case in the interest in generating a happy customer, but it’s not insane for them not to, either.

It *would* be different if this were a customer who simply had missed an update or two; this seems to be a case where it has fallen so far behind, despite the warnings, that it was not simply a case of a missed update or two.

While you are making accurate points perhaps I am in the minority, I have never read in detail my warranty contract in any of my last 35 cars. Then again I would not not update my car either

 

[rking0122]

when cars sit in inventory, i really doubt that someone is going around updating them all so that its within the warranty terms. When I took delivery, I *know* that the service center triggered the updates and there were many. Took several hours. If you have evidence that Lucid stated that the car was under warranty before purchasing, honestly, take it a lawyer. I'd say you have a case.

To be fair they haven’t told me the warranty is void. No one at service is telling me that, at least yet, it’s just something that’s being discussed here. They are just telling me the module that’s bad in this case is not a warranty item.

And they’ve repeatedly told me the warranty is active. Even on the form I got when I dropped it off for this issue. They’ve just changed course on this being a warranty item.

 

[borski]

Except I did exactly that. And this is what the car told me. I suppose I should have come here to ask the numbers everyone was on…but that seems like a stretch.

*That* is valid and compelling evidence for Lucid to comp it; there you go. Now you have the reasonable expectation that the car should have let you and/or the previous owner know of the update, and as far as you could tell, it was up to date.

That’s a much stronger case.

 

[Leftlane]

For $1400 (at retail price, certainly not Lucid’s cost), is this really worth Lucid denying? If they do, they’ll have an unhappy customer that will definitely not buy another Lucid and probably tells plenty of people about his experience. If they goodwill it, they will have a very happy customer that will talk up the service he received and will likely spend more $$ in the future.

 

[skomarla]

To be fair they haven’t told me the warranty is void. No one at service is telling me that, at least yet, it’s just something that’s being discussed here. They are just telling me the module that’s bad in this case is not a warranty item.

And they’ve repeatedly told me the warranty is active. Even on the form I got when I dropped it off for this issue. They’ve just changed course on this being a warranty item.

That doesn’t make sense. Is it a wear item like tires or brakes? Nope! I don’t understand their claim that this is not a warranty item. What reason have they provided for this?

To the manual or warranty term sleuths out there is this listed explicitly?

 

[PoZulu]

That is explicit. And I do remember there was an update that stated you have to install this or you will not be able to update in the future. But there really should be an exception for a car that is purchased secondhand, because the owner had no chance to update the car.