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

[rking0122]

Went to SC. Talked to manager and showed him others had this covered by warranty and that the car showed it was up to date. He didn’t care. No movement, my problem.

 

[rfc805]

Make sure you contact Customer Care also, not just service. It'll still have to go through service, but might get some help from that direction.

Given other Lucid service situations recently, doesn't seem like Lucid is too concerned with their reputation lately. Wonder why.

 

[Tâm]

Went to SC. Talked to manager and showed him others had this covered by warranty and that the car showed it was up to date. He didn’t care. No movement, my problem.

If you care to stand up for the principle of warranty and spend energy to enforce it, you should tell the manager since the warranty is not honored, you would pay under protest and seek justice in a small claims court. I would say your chance of getting $1,400 back is high, except you lose all the time and labor for the process in exchange.

 

[rfc805]

Not going to help you short term, but also in terms of principle, I'd maybe reach out to Steve Lehto with your story. This sort of thing is right up his alley. He'd likely have some pretty interesting things to say about it. http://lehtoslaw.com/steve-lehto/

 

[bikeriderbryan]

Yes. It makes zero sense. I build computers for fun and routinely flash firmware on all kinds of things all the time. I can understand why it couldn’t now be done remotely OTA perhaps. But I don’t understand how it bricks hardware or prevents them from reprogramming, even if there was a cost for the labor to do that. None of this makes sense to me.

Cost of being an early adopter with a young company maybe. Doesn’t make me feel great about my LCID holdings either.

Yes one would think you could just apply the updates starting back from what is on the car. The idea of it being bricked is ridiculous.

 

[rking0122]

It isn’t the money at this point. I’ve spent that money in effort twice over already and it isn’t worth it anymore. The experience has sapped my excitement about the car and the company and I do hope to get it back. I do dread having future issues though.

I appreciate the comments about small claims court and lawyers etc. I am a practicing trial lawyer myself, and while I do find myself standing on principle all the time, I don’t think the risk and effort vs reward is in balance over $1400.

I did not advertise to them that I am a lawyer because I think it is irrelevant to how this situation *should* have gone.

Now go make sure you update your cars, folks.

 

[rfc805]

For Steve Lehto - I don't mean engage him legally, but he does podcasts/youtube videos specifically on these topics and as an advocate. I just think he might be interested in sharing the story, and in general might be helpful to have it shared.

 

[suchluke]

It isn’t the money at this point. I’ve spent that money in effort twice over already and it isn’t worth it anymore. The experience has sapped my excitement about the car and the company and I do hope to get it back. I do dread having future issues though.

I appreciate the comments about small claims court and lawyers etc. I am a practicing trial lawyer myself, and while I do find myself standing on principle all the time, I don’t think the risk and effort vs reward is in balance over $1400.

I did not advertise to them that I am a lawyer because I think it is irrelevant to how this situation *should* have gone.

Now go make sure you update your cars, folks.

Your last bet at this point would be to direct message @mcr16 and see if this can be handled differently. I still think it should be covered under warranty. If the TCM is defective or inoperable and the car is still under warranty then it doesn't matter if you are the first or seconds owner, it should be covered.

 

[Tâm]

Now go make sure you update your cars, folks.

We can't be sure because the only notifications are in our car and app. If the app is content and never notified us because the car is content that version 2.0.158 is falsely up-to-date, then how would we know that the app and the car's notification are systemically flawed?

 

[Tâm]

Your last bet at this point would be to direct message @mcr16 and see if this can be handled differently. I still think it should be covered under warranty. If the TCM is defective or inoperable and the car is still under warranty then it doesn't matter if you are the first or seconds owner, it should be covered.

I am not a tech, but I don't think it's defective. It's just obsolete for new OTA versions. It's just like computer updates. Some computers need a BIOS flash update, or the updates won't ever happen.

 

[rking0122]

I am not a tech, but I don't think it's defective. It's just obsolete for new OTA versions. It's just like computer updates. Some computers need a BIOS flash update, or the updates won't ever happen.

I agree with you. Scottsdale service center doesn’t. It may be that replacement takes less time, and thus less money, to do.

 

[Dreaming]

Wife now won’t be preordering a Gravity though, at least at this time.

I was considering a Gravity. Not anymore. If this is Lucid 's idea of how to treat customers, I don't want anything to do with them.

 

[Leftlane]

I was considering a Gravity. Not anymore. If this is Lucid 's idea of how to treat customers, I don't want anything to do with them.

So it looks like my post #26 is dead on. This is silly on the part of that service manager.

 

[HC_79]

I was considering a Gravity. Not anymore. If this is Lucid 's idea of how to treat customers, I don't want anything to do with them.

I’ve had a bumpy ride with my Lucid ownership experience and have to applaud how the company has handled my issues.

If you’re going to jump ship on one unique experience that didn’t impact you in any way then more fool you.

 

[sdlucid]

I’ve had a bumpy ride with my Lucid ownership experience and have to applaud how the company has handled my issues.

If you’re going to jump ship on one unique experience that didn’t impact you in any way then more fool you.

I think it's not simply about one unique experience someone got into. It's about how the company is giving a hard time to a customer for a situation which is quite common sense for any company to do the job under warranty. It says more about the management, and how they are behaving very differently to second-hand buyers, who are potential buyers of their future product. For a company which is still in low volume, this can leave a bad mark. Many a times, all it takes is a one unique experience for people to get bad impression of a company no matter how many positive experiences are out there. It may not look fair, but it is what it is

 

[rfc805]

I’ve had a bumpy ride with my Lucid ownership experience and have to applaud how the company has handled my issues.

If you’re going to jump ship on one unique experience that didn’t impact you in any way then more fool you.

Maybe, but maybe not. I actually have also had good experiences so far.

But I've seen more than one customer have a bad experience. And specifically writing this into the warranty and then standing by it is more than a "bad experience" - it signals actual bad intent. Especially if Lucid checked the car for someone prior to their purchase.

There's layers of bad here, and certainly can sway your opinion before buying again, even if you've already bought.

You say "fool you", but how much bigger a fool would you feel if you ignored it, bought anyway, and then had the same experience?

There's lots of other cars out there.

 

[hydbob]

Maybe, but maybe not. I actually have also had good experiences so far.

But I've seen more than one customer have a bad experience. And specifically writing this into the warranty and then standing by it is more than a "bad experience" - it signals actual bad intent. Especially if Lucid checked the car for someone prior to their purchase.

There's layers of bad here, and certainly can sway your opinion before buying again, even if you've already bought.

You say "fool you", but how much bigger a fool would you feel if you ignored it, bought anyway, and then had the same experience?

There's lots of other cars out there.

I think it's important to remember, there is always the other side of the story. It would be silly to reach a conclusion without all the facts, which, given the history of complaints on this forum and finding out the other side, skews towards embellishment on the customer side more often than not. There is always more to a story than is typically presented.

 

[rfc805]

I think it's important to remember, there is always the other side of the story. It would be silly to reach a conclusion without all the facts, which, given the history of complaints on this forum and finding out the other side, skews towards embellishment on the customer side more often than not. There is always more to a story than is typically presented.

That is also fair.

That said, it was quoted from their warranty docs... So the bad intent is there, even if there's more to the story.

 

[HC_79]

I think it's not simply about one unique experience someone got into. It's about how the company is giving a hard time to a customer for a situation which is quite common sense for any company to do the job under warranty. It says more about the management, and how they are behaving very differently to second-hand buyers, who are potential buyers of their future product. For a company which is still in low volume, this can leave a bad mark. Many a times, all it takes is a one unique experience for people to get bad impression of a company no matter how many positive experiences are out there. It may not look fair, but it is what it is

I refrained from commenting on the situation because, while it appears that Lucid should have simply absorbed the cost, none of us know the underlying reasons or the internal workings behind the company’s closed-door decisions. There’s always two sides to every story.

I responded to the post because of the extreme reaction based on someone else’s highly personal experience. Instead of people resorting to criticism and negativity, perhaps they should wait until they personally experience the Lucid experience through actual ownership. If I were the original poster, it might be enough to reconsider a future purchase (although not necessarily), but for people to dismiss and abandon Lucid based solely on someone else’s negative experience is absurd.

It’s akin to someone posting, “I detest the iPhone,” and the other person responding, “Well, if they dislike the iPhone, then I’m not getting one. F Apple.”

 

[Pragmatic]

It's a bit more than someone saying "I detest the iPhone". The original poster has been fairly open (admittedly we are only hearing their side). In addition they are paying for the replacement part and hoping that this experience will not interfer with them loving the car.

The car was for sale in Salt Lake City in Feb of 2023 with 300 miles. It was also listed in September of 2024 as for sale with 890 miles in Costa Mesa CA. The poster (Scottsdale AZ) claims they bought it with 1200 miles. All of that seems reasonable. So it seems the car been for sale for a while. Presumably while the previous owner came to terms with the depreciation. It's not surprising that in that time the dealer (or previous owner) did not keep up with the updates.