In recent years, with the popularization of electric vehicles, new electric means of transportation such as electric bicycles and electric scooters have increasingly entered people's lives. However, due to the fact that some people did not follow the instructions, some accidents occurred. Among them, a typical example is the fire accident caused by "flying wire charging". The so-called "flying wire charging" refers to the dangerous behavior of charging electric vehicles through towing boards and other means. So, when the "flying wire charging" causes a fire and causes personal or property damage, who should bear the responsibility?
In May 2021, Mr. Gu purchased a four-wheeled electric vehicle from an electric vehicle business department and parked it in the courtyard on the first floor of his house. However, one day in November 2021, a fire broke out when Mr. Gu was using a power strip to charge an electric vehicle parked in the yard. The fire spread quickly and burned the surrounding combustible materials, causing injuries to several tenants and a lot of property damage.
The fire department conducted an inquest and physical evidence examination of the fire, and came up with the **cause**: the battery box of the four-wheeled electric vehicle**, which ignited the surrounding combustibles and caused the fire to expand.
As a victim of the fire accident, the tenant, Mr. Yang, filed a lawsuit with the Fengxian District People's Court in Shanghai, demanding that Mr. Gu, the manufacturer and seller of batteries and electric vehicles, as well as the owner of the electric car and the house, and his wife jointly bear the liability for tort damages. After the trial, the court of first instance held that the battery involved in the case had quality defects, and the seller and manufacturer of the battery should bear the corresponding responsibilityMr. Gu and his wife also bear some responsibility for the loss if they failed to charge the electric vehicle in accordance with the safety measures and stacked flammable materials at the charging area. Therefore, the court of first instance ruled that the merchant and the battery manufacturer who sold the electric car should bear 75% of the liability for Mr. Yang's losses, while Mr. Gu and his wife should bear 25% of the damages.
However, Mr. Yang was not satisfied with the verdict and appealed to the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court. After the trial, the court of second instance held that it was reasonable for the battery manufacturer and seller to bear 75% of the liability in the first-instance judgment, and for Mr. Gu and his wife to bear 25% of the liability, and rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment.
According to the judge, in recent years, the number of electric vehicles in China has gradually increased, bringing convenience to people's lives, but also often causing fire accidents. Some battery manufacturers are not strict enough in terms of quality control, which affects the safety of batteries. Especially when "flying wire charging" is carried out, the wiring board is often exposed to the outdoor environment, which can easily lead to the aging of the insulation material, resulting in problems such as leakage and short circuit, and increasing the risk of fire. In addition, if charging is carried out in buildings, passages and yards, once a fire occurs, it is easy to ignite the surrounding combustibles, expand the fire, and even hinder escape, causing serious safety hazards.
In general, for the damage caused by product quality defects, the product manufacturer and seller should be mainly held responsible. However, in this case, the user of the electric car, Mr. Gu, who was also the owner of the house, not only carried out "flying wire charging", but also stacked flammable materials at the charging area. No fire safety measures were taken at the site, further amplifying the impact of the battery**. The combination of multiple factors resulted in the injury of several people and the loss of a large amount of property. In view of the increased risk of fire and the failure of Mr. Gu to fulfill his duty of safety management, he should also be held responsible.
This case has triggered the regulation of electric vehicle charging behavior and the importance of fire safety in villages. Battery manufacturers for electric vehicles should strengthen quality control management and improve production technology. Users should also establish an awareness of safe charging, prohibiting indoor charging and "flying wire charging" to reduce the risk of batteries**. At the same time, it is recommended that relevant grassroots units increase charging facilities and venues, unblock electric vehicle charging channels, and work together to prevent the occurrence of fire safety hazards.
To sum up, this disaster accident has sounded the alarm bell for people about electric vehicle charging and village fire safety. Through this case, we are deeply aware of the seriousness of the electric vehicle fire accident and the potential safety hazards in the charging process. Only by strengthening the regulation of electric vehicle charging behavior, improving the quality and safety of batteries, and strengthening fire safety awareness, can we better protect the safety of people's lives and property.