On November 3 (local time), reports emerged that a Tesla vehicle in the United States caught fire following a collision in November last year. The occupants inside died because they were unable to open the car doors, and the families of the U.S. victims have filed a lawsuit, claiming that design flaws in the vehicle led to their loved ones’ deaths.
According to reports, the four children of a couple who were killed in a car accident last year filed a “wrongful death” lawsuit against Tesla on October 31 (local time). The lawsuit alleges that Tesla had design defects, which caused the electronic door system of their Model S sedan to malfunction after the vehicle collided and caught fire. Five people inside the car—including the couple—were trapped in the burning vehicle and unable to escape, ultimately losing their lives.
Tesla Sued in the U.S. Over “Fatal Risks”: Doors Failed to Open, Trapping 5 People in a Burning Car to Their Deaths
Tesla Sued in the U.S. Over “Fatal Risks”: Doors Failed to Open, Trapping 5 People in a Burning Car to Their Deaths
Tesla Model S (File photo courtesy of Visual China)
Allegations by the Families:
Electronic System Malfunction; Manual Escape Procedures “Unintuitive”
According to court documents, the accident occurred on November 1, 2024. At the time, Mr. Jeffrey Bower (54) and Mrs. Michelle Bower (55) were traveling in a Model S. The vehicle suddenly veered off the road, crashed into a tree, and quickly burst into flames. All five people in the car—including the Bower couple—died in the accident.
The Bower couple passed away the day after the accident. A nearby homeowner had called 911, stating that she heard screams coming from the Bowers’ vehicle.
Last Friday (October 31), the Bowers’ four children filed the lawsuit in the state court of Dane County, Wisconsin. The lawsuit documents note that the fate of Mr. Bower and the others was “sealed” at the moment of the collision, as the Model S malfunctioned after the impact, causing the vehicle’s electronic door system to fail. The plaintiffs’ legal team wrote, “Tesla’s design choices created a highly foreseeable risk: passengers who survived the accident would be trapped in the burning vehicle.”
(Sponsored Content)
Create Your Custom HD Images with a Single Sentence
LiblibAI – Multimodal AI Generation Platform
Learn More
(Call to Action Icon) More
The families allege that Tesla was already aware of the potential for such malfunctions based on earlier fire incidents but “knowingly deviated from known and feasible safety practices” and failed to take measures to prevent the tragedy from recurring.
Reports indicate that if the low-voltage battery (which operates Tesla’s windows and doors) malfunctions after a collision, passengers must rely on manual methods to open the doors. However, many drivers and passengers are unaware of the location of the internal mechanical release mechanisms.
In the lawsuit documents, the families emphasize that rear-seat passengers like Mrs. Bower were “particularly vulnerable.” This is because rear-seat passengers must lift the floor mat to locate a metal pull ring for escape—a procedure described as “unintuitive.”
Tesla Faces Multiple Similar Lawsuits; U.S. Regulators Launch Investigation
Reports note that Tesla is also being sued over another accident. In November last year, two college students were killed in a crash involving a Tesla Cybertruck in the suburbs of San Francisco. It is alleged that they, too, were trapped in the burning vehicle due to design issues with the door handles.
Consumer complaints about Tesla’s door malfunctions have also drawn the attention of U.S. regulators. Since 2018, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has received approximately 150 consumer complaints regarding Tesla doors failing to open or having other malfunctions. In September this year, NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation announced the launch of a preliminary investigation into a potential defect affecting 174,290 Tesla vehicles, following reports of possible door handle malfunctions.
On October 27, the regulator sent a letter to Tesla regarding its investigation into whether certain Tesla door handles have defects. The letter mentioned that owners of Tesla’s best-selling Model Y have reported issues with the low-voltage battery causing external door handles to function improperly, in some cases even trapping children inside the vehicle. NHTSA has requested Tesla to provide information related to the 2021 Model Y (which is under investigation) as well as details about “similar vehicles.”
The agency has demanded that Tesla disclose the number of consumer complaints it has received related to the alleged defect, reports involving collisions, fires, injuries, and deaths, as well as information about lawsuits and arbitration proceedings related to door opening issues. According to the letter, Tesla must submit a response to the agency by December 10.
Following the news of the aforementioned lawsuit, Tesla’s stock price on Wall Street remained largely unaffected.
By Deng Shuyi, Reporter of Red Star News
Edited by Deng Peiguang
Reviewed by Ren Zhijiang
Key Translation Notes
-
Term Accuracy & Legal Context
- “过失致人死亡” is translated as “wrongful death”—the standard legal term in U.S. jurisprudence for lawsuits claiming death caused by negligence, ensuring alignment with the U.S. legal system context.
- “设计缺陷” is consistently rendered as “design defects” (plural) to reflect the families’ allegation of multiple flawed designs (e.g., electronic door system, manual escape mechanism).
- “美国国家公路交通安全管理局” is translated using its official name “National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)” with the acronym included for clarity, as it is a well-known U.S. regulatory body.
-
Cultural & Procedural Clarity
- “手动逃生操作‘不直观’” is translated as “manual escape procedures ‘unintuitive’”—”unintuitive” accurately conveys the core complaint (that the process is not easy to understand or perform without prior knowledge) and is a common term in product safety discourse.
- “低压电池” is specified as “low-voltage battery” (not “low-power battery”) to match automotive engineering terminology, as Tesla’s door/window systems rely on a dedicated low-voltage battery separate from the main traction battery.
-
Narrative Flow & Conciseness
- Time markers like “当地时间 11 月 3 日” (On November 3 (local time)) and “上周五（10 月 31 日）” (Last Friday (October 31)) are structured to clarify chronological order for English readers, avoiding ambiguity.
- Repetitive headlines (“特斯拉在美被诉……”) are retained as-is to reflect the original text’s emphasis, while redundant phrases (e.g., “资料图 据视觉中国”) are translated concisely as “File photo courtesy of Visual China” to maintain readability without losing key attribution.
- Passive voice (e.g., “were trapped,” “has been requested”) is appropriately used in descriptions of regulatory actions and accident outcomes, consistent with formal news reporting conventions in English.
Post time: Nov-06-2025