Moment £50,000 electric Mercedes EQA explodes after suspected battery fault - destroying two other cars parked nearby
This is the terrifying moment a suspected faulty battery caused an electric car to spontaneously burst into flames and explode.
James Musonda, 33, from Sheffield, South Yorkshire, has spoken of the 'horrific' incident, saying he 'could've died' had he been in the car and his young daughter was just metres away in the house.
The ravaging blaze also destroyed two other cars nearby and the road itself.
He was woken by the loud explosion, thinking a tree had fallen on his home until he looked outside to see flames rising from his Mercedes EQA.
After checking on his wife and daughter, Mr Musonda rushed downstairs but was unable to leave because the fierce blaze engulfed the road.
Shocking footage shows the car was steadily smoking for a number of seconds before suddenly exploding - with a nearby fence and garden shed later catching fire.
Fire crews attended the scene until midday the next day - moving the car from the road to a nearby grass verge.
The father-of-one claims Mercedes is refusing to investigate because the car was leased through his company via the Tusker salary sacrifice car scheme.
The pensions consultant said: 'It was horrific. I thought it was a tree that had fallen or something on the house - it was terrifying.
'When I realised it was my car I was screaming and hysterical. All I could see was flames when I opened the door.
'My daughter was in the house...I could have died if I was in that car.'
'We couldn't get out the house because of the flames in front of the house. The fire brigade managed to get us out, but it kept making little explosions.
'We're very shaken up - if I see an electric car I stay well away from it.'
Mr Musonda's car was recalled by Mercedes for work in October 2024, but he wasn't told why.
He said: 'They needed to bring it in for safety work and they had it until mid-January.
'They didn't give me any report on what the issue was and what they had done. They said there was nothing to be paid, and it was all under warranty. Six weeks later, it explodes.'
But Mercedes is refusing to investigate the fire or accept responsibility and are taking away the courtesy car provided, the father has claimed.
He said: 'Initially, they provided me with another car and they would investigate. Now they are taking it away.
After checking on his wife and daughter, Mr Musonda, rushed downstairs but was unable to leave because the fierce blaze engulfed the road
'About a month ago they sent me an email to say that Tusker should be investigating it because the lease was through them and that Mercedes had nothing to do with it.
'I contacted Tusker, and they said they were waiting for Mercedes factory representatives to see it and Mercedes again say it's not their fault.
'They haven't acknowledged me or shown any sympathy at all.
'I've asked what work was done when they had the car from October to January and they've ignored me.
'Tusker just provide the agreement; Mercedes deliver the car to me. It's a Mercedes car, their build.'
MailOnline have contacted Mercedes and Tusker for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
18 minutes ago
- The Sun
Millionaire toy maker's son fighting to block half-brother from dad's £14.5m fortune after mum's secret affair revealed
A MILLIONAIRE toy maker's son is fighting to boot his illegitimate half-brother out of his dad's £14.5m family fortune after their mum's secret affair was revealed. Stuart Marcus built a lucrative games empire after he began selling dolls' houses from a room above a small East London toy shop in the 1960s. 3 Shortly before he died, he put £14.5m worth of company shares into trust for his "children," with brothers Edward, 47, and Jonathan, 43, both benefiting. But the family was thrown into turmoil after the revelation that Edward was not Stuart's son, but instead the product of an affair between his mum, Patricia Marcus, and lawyer Sydney Glossop. Last year, a judge ruled that Stuart was not Edward's dad, but said that Edward could still benefit from the £14.5m fortune on the basis that both brothers were intended to share. This week, the case came back to court, with lawyers for Jonathan arguing that it was wrong to let solicitor Edward share the wealth when he was not Stuart's biological son. Barrister Thomas Braithwaite, for Jonathan, insisted that the word "children" in the trust document meant "biological children" and so could not include Edward. Stuart Marcus - dubbed "a modest man with a big dream and a big heart" by business colleagues - founded Kitfix Hobbies in 1962 and carved out a major niche in toys, board games and craft kits, later transferring the company HQ to Swaffham, in Norfolk. The disputed trust he set up holds shares valued at £14.5m in the family companies, in which both brothers worked as the brand grew and diversified into other fields such as property, with Jonathan heading up successful commercial operations in Germany. But since 2016, relations between the two brothers soured, climaxing in the High Court clash, in which Jonathan claimed Edward should be excluded from benefiting under the trust. Jonathan claimed Edward was the product of a one-night stand his mum Patricia Marcus, 82, had with a lawyer named Sydney Glossop while his dad was away on business. That claim was based on Jonathan's discovery in 2023 of the "monumental" news that Patricia had confided in Edward that he wasn't Stuart's son during a confidential chat 14 years ago. Although Edward kept his secret for more than a decade, when Jonathan learned the news it triggered a court fight as he tried to have Edward removed as a beneficiary of the multimillion-pound family trust established before Stuart's death, aged 86, in 2020. Jonathan commissioned DNA evidence to back his claim, while his mum told the court herself that she had no doubt that Edward's real dad was Sydney, with whom she had a brief encounter over 40 years ago. From the witness box, Edward told how his mum suddenly spilled the revelation about her affair and his paternity during a meeting at his home in 2010. He said he then searched online for anything about his mystery dad, finally tracking him down to a retirement home near Birmingham, which he and his mum visited in order to meet Sydney. Once there, he witnessed the pair of them "cuddling," said Edward, telling the court: "I saw her sit on the bed and cuddle him and I was shocked to see her behaving that way because it wasn't the way I saw her behave with my father." However, he said he began to harbour doubts about his mum's news and claimed she went back on her account in 2010 when she told him she was wrong about Sydney being his dad. After three days in court last year judge Master Matthew Marsh, found that the evidence confirmed that Edward is not Stuart's son. But found the family trust does not exclude Edward, as in the context of the trust settlement, the word "children" meant both boys. This week, representing Jonathan in an appeal at the High Court, Mr Braithwaite argued that Master Marsh had got it wrong and that Edward should not benefit. Stuart's trust described the beneficiaries as his "children," which Mr Braithwaite insisted could only be taken in its ordinary meaning, "biological children." But for Edward, barrister Matthew Mills argued that it was obvious that Stuart had intended to benefit Edward and urged the judge to dismiss Jonathan's appeal. "Jonathan is doing this to try to take away from Edward any rights in this multi-million pound family business," he told the High Court judge. "Stuart intended to benefit Edward, who he designated and thought to be his child. Realistically, the reasonable person would think that Edward is a beneficiary of this settlement." Following a half-day in court, Sir Anthony reserved his judgment on Jonathan's bid to exclude his brother from the family fortune until a later date. 3
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Driver running late for work killed wife in tragic crash
A motorist killed his wife in a head-on crash after he claimed he was running late for work. Asen Kurtev was driving his wife Sofka Mitkova and three colleagues to work as he overtook several vehicles as he travelled to Spalding on 4 March last year. Kurtev, 46, carried out 'an obviously highly dangerous' overtake on the A16 outside Boston in Lincolnshire and crashed into an oncoming Volkswagen Scirocco. His colleagues were seriously injured in the crash while his wife Sofka, 39, suffered fatal chest injuries. The driver of the Volkswagen also sustained multiple serious injuries in the collision including fractures, and has since undergone surgery for his injuries. Kurtev was jailed at Lincoln Crown Court on Thursday for 10 years and nine months, for causing death by dangerous driving, with concurrent sentences of 36 months for three counts of causing serious injury by dangerous driving in relation to three backseat passengers in his Vauxhall Zafira. In addition, he was handed a 27-month concurrent sentence for causing serious injury to the driver of the oncoming vehicle he crashed into. Judge Catarina Sjolin Knight KC told Kurtev that the loss of his wife is a 'pain and punishment you will carry forever'. The court heard husband and wife passengers Kiril Ribarov and Gayla Ribarova, who were in the back of Kurtev's car alongside Dimitar Dimitrov, told the defendant to slow down as he overtook multiple vehicles while driving them to work at JZ Flowers at about 6.50am. Prosecution counsel Tony Stanford said it was Kurtev's job to pick up workers and drive to them to the factory for the 7am shift, but he was 25 minutes late collecting them, and Mr Ribarov told police it was clear he was 'trying to catch up on his lateness'. He described Kurtev's behaviour, including overtaking a line of four or five cars on the A16, in a manoeuvre lasting around 15 seconds on the busy road, as 'suicide, kamikaze driving'. Judge Sjolin Knight said that, like many Lincolnshire A-roads, the A16 was flat and straight with good visibility, and that the conditions were 'not such that there was any point in overtaking as there was a line of traffic'. Kurtev's car was 'wholly in the other carriageway' when he crashed head on into a Volkswagen Scirocco being driven by Cameron Marshall, who was left with fractures to his lower spine and wrist, and damage to his spleen and upper bowel, and required surgery to his abdomen and his forearm, which needed to be realigned. In a victim impact statement, Mr Marshall, who was 22 at the time and a professional HGV driver, said the crash was 'never something I ever thought I would experience', and the effect his injuries have had on his family has been 'truly heartbreaking'. All three of Kurtev's passengers, none of whom were wearing a seat belt because they reportedly did not work, were seriously injured, and Mr Ribarov said he and his wife have had to return to Bulgaria. He said the crash, which left him with a fractured eye socket, cheekbone, kneecap and wrist, had caused 'horrendous stress', adding: 'We were in a foreign country with no income and no support. 'When this happened, we came to England to work, but had to return to Bulgaria because we couldn't work. Everything in Bulgaria is so expensive, I can't support my family.' Representing Kurtev, who pleaded guilty to the offences on Monday, which was due to be the first day of his trial, John McNally said he never would have carried out the overtake if he had seen Mr Marshall's car coming towards him. He said: 'He is truly sorry for what happened, he never meant for it to happen. 'He realises the failings were his and he regrets what has been caused to everybody and knows it is a daily reminder, from the destruction of his family life, of what he did. 'It will weigh heavily on him. 'In custody he will be largely alone as a man with limited skills and limited language.' Addressing Kurtev, of Carlton Road in Boston, who listened to proceedings via a Bulgarian interpreter, Judge Sjolin Knight said: 'The small car coming towards you was driven by 22-year-old Cameron Marshall, a professional HGV driver. 'The drivers of the three cars behind yours saw his car, you should have seen it too, particularly as you were the one pulling out to drive on his side of the road. 'Whether you saw it and thought you could get back in before he reached you, or you didn't see it, I cannot determine. 'The traffic conditions were not such that there was any point in overtaking, there was a line of traffic. 'The amount of traffic meant this was a manoeuvre you never should have attempted because there was no safe way back into the line of traffic. 'Witnesses inside and outside the car described it as suicidal, kamikaze and crazy. It is not a safe manoeuvre that went wrong.' She added: 'You were the one who had embarked on an obviously highly dangerous manoeuvre and the result was a head-on collision. 'The results of that head-on collision have been catastrophic.' The judge said Kurtev may face being automatically deported after his sentence, of which he must serve two-thirds, and was banned from driving for five years upon his release.
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Flames engulf Halifax home following huge explosion with three injured and dozens evacuated
An explosion at a house in Halifax has left three people injured and multiple homes damaged as a result, with 14 properties being forced to evacuate. Video footage taken by witnesses shows the property on Spring Hall Grove ablaze with pillars of smoke towering into the sky on Thursday (26 June), as emergency service vehicles can be spotted on the scene. West Yorkshire Police confirmed that two people from the house were taken to hospital with serious injuries, whilst a third individual, who was in a different property, is being seen by medical staff for minor injuries. 'The cause of the explosion remains under investigation,' the force said.
