I agree with this, but given how much of the value of EVs is tied to the accessibility of a charger network, it seems like this really needs to be reported on the title somehow.
Even if Tesla is the only one doing this right now, I'm sure it'll be a thing in the future with other manufacturers and a proliferation of 3rd party repairs.
Tesla controls the supercharger network, vehicle registry and vehicle software, and nowhere in the process of acquiring the vehicle did the customer get notice that the car was banned from the network. Tesla has some culpability here since the title was clean.
People still think they own cars, and that they should be allowed to repair them without the blessing of the manufacturer. They don't expect to be banned from using their car because someone decided that using the DMCA to pervert the concept of ownership was a good thing.
No one is banning them from using their care. Just from plugging their car into a device that has enough power to kill anyone who happens to use that care because of shoddy repair work.
But the state confirmed the vehicle never had a salvaged title, so, what was the scam?
I wasn't even aware that it was possible for a car to be banned from the supercharger network. Sure, it makes sense in hindsight, but I wouldn't necessarily expect a used car dealer to know anything about this either.
That's not smart infrastructure, that's dumb infrastructure.