Axa Switzerland probably didn’t expect the media frenzy that their staging video aroused. After simulating a fire in a burning Tesla, the insurer apologizes.
Axa Insurance finally apologizes. In a post titled “AXA apologizes for 2022 crash tests “, the company returned to the controversy, which arose after it distorted a crash test with a Tesla.
Wanting to demonstrate the risk of fire of the electric vehicle, the insurer was overwhelmed by the facts. For the filmed and broadcast demo, the Tesla was without a battery and the fire that followed the crash test was staged with pyrotechnics. Caught in the act of manipulation and lying, the insurance group finally reacted and clumsily apologized.
Apologies, yes, but the damage has already been done.
Whether we are talking about the video simulating an accident, or the survey carried out among Swiss customers, nothing happens in Axa Switzerland’s communication. The insurer may well apologize, the damage has of course already been done. The electric anti-vehicles will have every opportunity to retrieve the images from the insurer to continue explaining that the electric vehicle would be dangerous…
In its message, the Swiss company AXA indicates that it did not want to harm electric vehicles: ” We regret that the 2022 edition of the crash tests may have given a bad impression of electromobility or created misunderstandings about it. We are convinced that the switch to electric will play a central role in the future of automobile traffic. That is why we believe it is important to delve into electromobility and the safety it offers. »
The brand also recognizes for itself that the test was very distorted: ” In addition, the crash test carried out with a model of the Tesla brand did not cause damage to the underside of the car that could cause a fire in the battery, contrary to what the recorded images might suggest.. In its study, Axa Switzerland wanted to question the population about the fact that the underside is a particularly sensitive area for electric vehicles.
Finally, is it necessary to specify that a thermal vehicle can very well leave its oil pan in similar conditions? By contrast, battery packs are much better protected than the mechanical parts of many internal combustion cars.
Axa continues to justify her study
Instead of failing to admit its mistake, Axa Suisse tries anyway to justify its statement: “ Statistics from AXA Switzerland show that compared to drivers of traditional combustion vehicles, electric car owners are responsible for 50% more collisions resulting in damage to their own vehicle. They also show that drivers of powerful electric vehicles are more likely to cause damage to their own vehicle or to third-party vehicles. It is these statistical results that we wanted to draw attention to during this year’s crash tests, by presenting the dangers that can arise in accidents involving electric cars. »
A way of wanting to save face that runs the risk of exacerbating grudges. In various Tesla communities, and more broadly in electric vehicles, we have seen comments from Axa group customers surprised by the method, saying they are willing to change their insurer.
You have to go to the end of the long message to read an important element: ” We made it clear in our press release that according to statistics from AXA Switzerland, electric cars are no more prone to fires than conventional combustion vehicles. However, we must recognize that the published images give a different impression when taken out of context. »
So why did you want to carry out a crash test that would have shown otherwise? Wanting to play with fire, we sometimes get burned.
#Axa #meaculpa #rigged #crash #test #burning #Tesla