ar allegations of reduced range on its electric cars just took another hit.

A British appeals court dismissed a libel lawsuit filed by Tesla against the BBC's Top Gear show. The court rejected Tesla's appeal of a court decision last year that struck out its "libel and malicious falsehood" case against BBC. Tesla had asserted that the popular British automotive TV show had faked a scene that appeared to show a Tesla Roadster running out of power, which the Palo Alto, CA-based automaker said caused sales to drop. Top Gear road tested two Roadsters in 2008 around a track much more like racing conditions that typical day-to-day driving. Drivers tested the electric sports cars for acceleration, straightline speed, cornering and handling. Top Gear claimed the car ran out of power after 55 miles much lower than the automaker's estimated range of 200 miles. The TV show's review wouldn't have misled "a reasonable viewer" into thinking that the Roadster's range was less than the company's estimate under normal driving conditions, said Martin Moore-Bick, an appeals court judge in London, in his decision. Tesla claimed it had lost $171,000 in lost sales as a result of the show's review of the car, and were well below the level of sales in the United States and European Union. Tesla's lawyers argued that the comments were defamatory because it had "intentionally or recklessly grossly misled potential purchasers." Judge Moore-Bick disagreed, saying the comments did not libel Tesla. Viewers would recognize that Top Gear's high-speed track testing was quite different than a normal driving style, he said. Inaccurate media coverage can cost Tesla Motors much more than $171,000, according to CEO Elon Musk. He said that the "fake" report by New York Times writer John Broder on reduced range during his Model S road trip may have wiped out as much as $100 million in stock value for Tesla Motors. Musk asserts that the article resulted in several cancelled orders, probably costing Tesla "a few hundred" Model S purchases. News Source: Bloomberg Category: EV/Plug-in, Tesla Motors, UK Tags: bbc, british court, electric vehicle, ev range, new york times, roadster, tesla model s, tesla motors, top gear, uk Add a Comment

Sign in
Type your comment here

Add a Comment Maximum

*0 / 3000 Character

142 Comments Filter by: johnrysf Wow. Top Gear is great fun when their antics amplify some attribute of a car. When they go over the top (so to speak), their shtick sometimes gets silly and boring. IMHO. The guys get busy being oh so full of themselves and so funny with each other that the car is left out, or, worse, is portrayed as a caricature of itself (their subject IS motor vehicles, right?). I just saw this story. To me, a senior citizen gear-head, it isn't funny. In a rather transparent attempt to unfairly denigrate the Roadster as not ready for the real world, Top Gear intentionally misrepresented the product. Ha ha, that's libel. People sue over such stuff. The court said that no reasonable person would fail to realize that range at the track would be less than on the street. OK, but how about showing us that the car really has a 245-mile range on the road? Nah, then the Roadster might possibly look like a reasonable proposition. The court seemed to forget the falsified items: (1) The 2 cars did NOT break down, (2) did NOT need to be pushed (they portrayed it as a regularly occurring problem - now THAT'S injury), (3) the brakes still WORKED without power assist (and replacing a blown fuse is SOP in a road test review), and (4) the car takes 3.5 hours to charge, not 16. If I saw the show when originally aired, I would have quickly concluded that the Roadster was too flawed to consider as a regular driver, and certainly not worth $100K plus. That would have been wrong, of course, as ~2,600 very happy owners have since proven. Mr. Musk could have let this go, but, hey, there was a struggling company at stake. Musk is/was the whiny a**hole? Like him or not, he had to put out some kind of rebuttal. And gotta' say, both Top Gear and the court were wrong here. Gosh, fellow ICE lovers, how could that happen? Please see my last two paragraphs below. ps: If you haven't read it, you might read "Top Gear Responds to Teslas Lawsuit", a 4/6/11 article in which Andy Wilman, Top Gear's executive producer, discusses Tesla Motors lawsuit. Mr. Wilman, after he whines that Tesla isn't being nice, is disingenuous and slippery to a degree that literally made me wince. The article is at http://www.wired.com/autopia/2011/04/top-gear-responds-to-teslas-lawsuit/. Contrast this with "Elon Musk Calls Top Gear 'Completely Phony'", a 4/5/11 article at http://www.wired.com/autopia/2011/04/elon-musk-calls-top-gear-completely-phony/. IMHO, Mr. Musks' arguments ring true. Mr. Wilman wrote "At the end of the day, the Tesla performed admirably but fell short because its drawbacks outweigh its advantages. Our conclusion was based primarily on the fact that it costs three times more than the petrol sports car upon which its based, and it takes a long time to recharge; you cant use it as easily as a

petrol sports car for the carefree motoring journeys that are a prerequisite [sic] of sports car driving". Why didn't Top Gear drop the deception, and just give us this in a balanced review? August 17 2013 at 11:53 PM Patrick No sh*^ March 12 2013 at 9:35 PM JakeY For all of the people asking about the $171,000: Tesla never wanted to sue for damages. Their main goal was to get Top Gear to make a correction/clarification of the episode for repeat airings of the show. They started the lawsuit with cap of any payout at 100,000 maximum and no specific amount. The judge said he would throw out the suit unless Tesla amends it with a specific damage amount. And given the UK law has a 1 year time limit for malicious falsehood claims, by that time they got around to it (2011) the damage amount can only be calculated based on reruns of the episode in the UK (not the original airing in 2008 with multiple times as many viewers). The amount was likely calculated from a formula that takes into account the number of audience of the reruns, how many potential customers are in that audience, how many Roadsters have been sold so far, and how many potential sales can be made. They aren't going to interview all the audience to see which one would or would not buy it and then verify if they have the means to buy one. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/oct/28/top-gear-tesla-malicious-falsehood March 11 2013 at 11:36 PM imtoomuch1 Every sane person knows Top Gear isn't serious. They don't even take themselves seriously. Musk is just continuing his spoiled brat, douchebag ways. I want Tesla to fail, which I am positive that it WILL, simply because I hate the asshat named Musk! March 11 2013 at 7:07 PM -4 Rento Top Gear does give out car advice. Stop saying it doesn't, it's idiotic. It's full of comedy bits and unfortunately quite a lot of crap, however this doesn't take away the fact that they put up a show of being serious when they put a car through a review. Has anyone really thought the GT86 was pure comedy ?? And the Tesla?? Did you all laugh out loud pointing at the screen saying "aw yeah that is comedy!" and then disregarded it completely?

I don't know if this has impacted a buyers choice or not but it definitely impacts the brand. Thankfully Tesla produces quality cars and time has proven they are worthy. What Top Gear did it's not fair, it's unhelpful and it's not entertaining. March 11 2013 at 7:04 PM +3 1 reply to Rento's comment Dave "Top Gear does give out car advice." You're absolutely right. And they were correct to advise petrol-heads against buying a Tesla Roadster. It is no substitute for a real sports car. March 12 2013 at 10:39 PM -1 2 replies to Dave's comment Dave Tesla should be sued for building an excellent commuter vehicle and advertising it as a sports car. March 13 2013 at 7:42 AM -2 Dave And Top Gear deserves credit for calling them out on it. That is their job. March 13 2013 at 9:56 AM -2 Fernando First of all Top Gear is in no way a documentary or fact related type of show, and I am pretty sure anyone that watches it, watches it for it's entertainment value and not for it's consumer review value. For Tesla to even attempt a lawsuit like this they are stoooopid (Jeremy Clarkson voice). Second if they ever watched Top Gear at all they would know that they don't care much for Hybrids or Green cars at all. This reminds me of when they raced the Pryus (again british accent) vs the M3, and the Prius got like 20mph or something stoooopid like that. I don't think Toyota sued them, why? Because it was meant for entertainment not fact. I remember that

episode and Tesla should be worrying about reliability more then anything else because if I remember correctly they had to replace stuff like twice because it broke. March 11 2013 at 3:56 PM -1 EJD1984 It all just really boils down to the producers of Top Gear UK have a MAJOR prejudice against any/all American cars. And will look for, or manufacture, an opportunity to disparage one in a review. March 11 2013 at 2:35 PM -2 Arturo Rios Jr. To someone that doesn't understand the show its easy to see how someone might get offended. I got offended to some degree when they made fun of us Mexicans, even our Manchester United Mexican striker "el chicharito" got involve. At the end Top Gear makes up for it and you just forgive the show simply because its so darn good and not meant to really offend anyone. The episodes in top gear are all misleading with the exception of the test track times and the Stig. March 11 2013 at 1:03 PM +1 gmsexton really 171,000 in lost sales.... sales... not profit.. so like three cars? how in the hell can you even come to the conclusion is was top gear's profile that caused three less cars to be sold? given the poor ratings everyone else was give the car for the exact reason of poor distance between charges... and not what the company claimed... unless three people walked into the dealership and said..."gee... i am not buying this car becasue i watch the episode of top gear"... you can't blame the show.. the funny thing is i am sure far more was spent on attorneys... March 11 2013 at 12:55 PM +3 John Tesla will sue anyone to blame sales losses on anything it seems. Its really unforunate that they're making themselves look even worse with so many law suites. March 11 2013 at 11:11 AM +3 Load more comments

Socialize

Podcasts Facebook Twitter YouTube Google+ RSS

Research A New Car

All Makes All Models
ZIP

Popular News Stories1 of 4

Pint-sized Buddy electric vehicle stops 80-ton freight train in its tracks 2014 Honda CR-Z Hybrid gets $20 price increase, starts at $19,995* Beijing shuts down highways, airport in fight against smog BMW prices i3 range extender option at $3,950 US Prius Plug-In Hybrid gets price cut, won't get JDM two-tone paint

Find A Used Car

All Makes All Models
ZIP

Featured Photo Galleries

You Might Also Like

2013 Acura ZDX by Seyth Miersma BMW X1 testing is underway by Brandon Turkus 2015 Volvo S60 T6 Drive-E [w/video] by Matt Davis

AOL Autos Best Deal

Anonymously negotiate with dealers near you. Select from over 12,000 dealers to get your Best Deal. Find a Deal

Green Vehicle Resources

Alternative Fuels Data Center EPA Green Vehicle Guide Fuel Efficient Vehicle Tax Incentives