Maren had explained the criminal exposure Tamsin was facing under New Mexico statute, the regulatory framework that authorized the engineering response, and the broader policy implications for off-grid residential energy security across the state. Maren had also told Sigrid that the case was, by her professional assessment, the kind of case New Mexico regulatory law was written to protect against. Sigrid had thanked her. Sigrid had spent another 2 days on the porch thinking. On the eve of the 22nd of November, Sigrid had said to me, in her quiet, certain voice, "Otto, do it.
The engineering is sound. The regulatory framework is sound. The proportionality is sound. The alternative is allowing the theft to continue for another 6 months while the criminal case progresses through the courts. I will not let her steal from us for another season.
Implement the routine tomorrow night." I had agreed. I had implemented the routine the next night. I implemented the voltage modulation routine on the evening of the 22nd of November at exactly 8:58 p.m. The routine ran for 60 seconds at standard 240 volts to allow Tamsin's 9:00 p.m. charging to begin normally. The routine then stepped up to 285 volts across the next 90 seconds.
The routine reached the target output of 380 volts at 9:03 p.m. and held that output for 4 minutes and 17 seconds. The routine then stepped back down to standard 240 volts across the next 90 seconds. The total event lasted approximately 7 minutes. The inverter logged every parameter automatically. The current clamp data loggers on the unauthorized output line confirmed the voltage delivery across the full event.
The Tesla's onboard charger received the spike across the full four-minute window. The Tesla's internal diagnostic system logged the event as input voltage out of specification, charger damage detected. The Tesla's mobile app sent Tamsin an immediate notification at 9:06 p.m. The notification indicated vehicle charging system error, immediate service required. Tamsin came out to the garage at 9:11 p.m. She unplugged the Tesla. She tried to restart the charge.
The vehicle would not accept charging at any input. The vehicle's onboard diagnostic system reported the onboard charger as non-functional, replacement required. She called Kendrick. Kendrick was in Albuquerque on business. Kendrick called Tesla roadside assistance.
Tesla dispatched a service truck the following morning. The Tesla service technician, a young Tesla certified specialist named Pim Bouchard, no relation to Wendell, just a coincidence of names, diagnosed the onboard charger as catastrophically damaged. He reviewed the Tesla's logged charging history. He saw the voltage anomaly at 9:03 p.m. on the 22nd of November. He saw the sustained 380 volt input across the full 4-minute window.
He reviewed the diagnostic codes. He filed his report with Tesla service in Fremont, California. Tesla's warranty review team contacted Tamsin 3 days later. Tesla informed her that the charger damage had been caused by input voltage substantially out of warranty specification, indicating an unauthorized or improperly installed power source. Tesla refused warranty coverage.
The replacement cost was $14,200 for the charger assembly, plus labor and recalibration fees totaling another 2,200. Tamsin's total out-of-pocket exposure was $16,400. Her own auto insurance policy declined coverage because the damage was attributable to intentional electrical service deviation upstream of the vehicle. She had no path to recovery from Tesla, from her insurance, or from her warranty. She filed a civil suit against me in Sandoval County District Court on the 11th of December.