作者 / 莫 莉 编辑 / 黄大 路 2.43 亿巨额赔偿 案 这场风暴的序幕，由一宗牵动行业神经的天价赔偿案率先拉开。 设计 / 张 萌 2025年8月的第一周，特斯拉仿佛驶入风暴眼。 8月6日，埃隆·马斯克在社交媒体上高调宣布，公司正训练一款参数规模约为现有版本10倍、视频性能大幅提升的新一代全自动驾驶（FSD）模型，并 有望于下月末向公众发布。 按照马斯克的说法，此次升级不仅会极大增强FSD系统对道路环境的感知和理解能力，也将显著提升其安全性和可靠性，为未来的完全自动驾驶铺平 道路。 然而，美国市场却给特斯拉接连出"下马威"：佛罗里达州陪审团在8月1日裁定，特斯拉对2019年一起致命车祸负有部分责任，需赔偿受害者2.43亿美 元（约人民币17.5亿元）；8月5日，股东们也对马斯克"吹嘘"的Robotaxi业务安全性发起诉讼。 屋漏偏逢连夜雨，7月7日至7月21日期间，美国盖洛普公司进行一项民调，结果显示马斯克是"美国人最不喜欢的公众人物"。8月6日，当有人向特朗 普抛出"如何看待马斯克受此殊荣"时，他的回答是："马斯克是个好人，尽管他有过糟糕时刻。" 如今，"好人" 马斯克官司缠身。死亡事故引发的巨额赔 ...

来源：新浪科技 作者：郑峻 特斯拉首次败诉，被判支付2.43亿美元赔偿！ 那些年马斯克夸大的宣传，如今都成为了对特斯拉不利的证据。特斯拉在辅助驾驶相关诉讼的不败纪录 就此终结，或将为未来类似追责诉讼设立先例。 特斯拉首次败诉 上周五，佛罗里达州迈阿密的联邦陪审团作出裁决，认定特斯拉需要对2019年佛罗里达一起致命车祸承 担部分责任，并要求特斯拉支付总计2.43亿美元的赔偿，以阻止特斯拉未来的类似行为。 在为期三周的庭审之后，八人组成的陪审团又经过两天的讨论后认定，特斯拉对那起车祸负有三分之一 的责任，而驾驶员负有三分之二的责任。特斯拉轿车的驾驶员因低头捡拾掉落的手机造成事故，他已另 行被起诉。 陪审团认定原告遭受的痛苦和精神损失总计1.29亿美元，但鉴于特斯拉仅负部分责任，其需支付三分之 一的赔偿，即4300万美元的补偿性赔偿。再加上2亿美元的惩罚性赔偿，特斯拉需要总计向原告支付 2.43亿美元赔偿。 中国最为熟知的美国麦当劳咖啡烫伤案（Liebeck v． McDonald's）就是最典型的案例。1994年一位79 岁的老太太被麦当劳递过来的热咖啡烫伤，起诉之后获得了20万美元的实际赔偿以及270万美元的惩 ...

Core Viewpoint - Tesla's UBI (Usage-Based Insurance) model for electric vehicles has not met expectations, with a high loss ratio and ongoing operational losses despite the company's ambitions to leverage driving data for lower premiums [3][5][10]. Group 1: Insurance Performance - Tesla's insurance division has a payout ratio significantly higher than the industry average, with 2022-2024 ratios showing 116.6%, 114.7%, and 103.3% respectively, compared to industry averages of 80.1%, 75.4%, and 66.1% [7]. - The reliance on a safety scoring system to adjust premiums has faced criticism, with users reporting that cautious driving can lead to lower scores, raising concerns about the transparency of the algorithm [4][7]. - The insurance business has been operating at a loss, with payouts exceeding premium income, indicating a need for Tesla to reassess its insurance strategy [4][10]. Group 2: Customer Sentiment and Challenges - Customer dissatisfaction is evident, with complaints about long repair times, poor communication, and lengthy claims processes, leading to only 28% of Tesla owners opting for the company's insurance [9][10]. - The lack of global standards for electric vehicle insurance, particularly regarding liability for autonomous driving, adds complexity and risk to Tesla's insurance operations [8]. - Experts suggest that Tesla must balance insurance rates, claims expenses, and associated risks to avoid continued losses, indicating a critical juncture for the company's insurance business [10]. Group 3: Competitive Landscape - Traditional insurance companies are increasingly adopting UBI products, which may threaten Tesla's competitive edge in the insurance market as they leverage established data advantages [9]. - The ongoing high payout ratios could impact Tesla's credit rating, as noted by S&P Global, highlighting the financial implications of the current insurance model [10]. - The challenges faced by Tesla's insurance business reflect a broader tension between technological aspirations and commercial realities, suggesting a need for a dual focus on technology and operational efficiency [10].