Tesla faces lawsuit from 10 Beijing owners over Full Self-Driving ads
In brief
- Ten Tesla owners filed a lawsuit in Beijing's Daxing District People's Court alleging Full Self-Driving deceptive advertising.
- Plaintiffs purchased FSD between 2019–2021 for RMB 56,000–64,000 and seek refunds plus triple damages.
- Lawsuit alleges FSD restricted to HW4 hardware while plaintiffs' vehicles have HW3 hardware.
- Similar FSD disputes certified as class actions in US; raised in Australia and Europe.
- Tesla maintains FSD partially implemented with additional features under development.
The lawsuit and damages sought
The ten plaintiffs purchased Full Self-Driving between 2019 and 2021, paying between RMB 56,000 and RMB 64,000 (roughly $7,800 to $8,900) per vehicle. Nine of the ten owners are seeking refunds plus triple damages on their FSD purchases specifically, a remedy available under Chinese consumer protection law. The tenth plaintiff is pursuing a more aggressive claim: triple damages applied to the entire cost of the vehicle. The total damages sought exceed RMB 3.95 million.
The core complaint
The plaintiffs allege that the Full Self-Driving feature is restricted to vehicles running Tesla's newer HW4 hardware, while their cars came equipped with HW3 hardware. Tesla marketed a feature called "Full Self-Driving" that, in practice, amounts to what the owners describe as "Intelligent Driving Assistance." The gap between the name and the actual capability is central to their fraud claim.
Tesla's position is straightforward: the company maintains that FSD has been partially implemented and that additional features remain under development. That defense hasn't satisfied courts or consumers elsewhere.
A global pattern
This Beijing case is not isolated. A class action related to Full Self-Driving was certified in 2025 in the United States, consolidating complaints from American buyers with the same grievance. Similar claims have surfaced in Australia and Europe, and individual Tesla owners have won small-claims court victories seeking FSD refunds.
The pattern suggests a systemic issue with how Tesla has marketed and delivered the feature.
Why China matters
China is Tesla's second-largest market and a critical pillar of its growth strategy. The country's regulatory environment is tightening around consumer protections and vehicle safety claims. Domestic Chinese EV makers including BYD, NIO, and XPeng are pushing their own advanced driver-assistance systems in the same market, and they're watching how Chinese courts treat Tesla's claims.
A loss in Beijing could reshape how Tesla markets autonomous-driving features in Asia and set a precedent that ripples across its global operations.
