Misleading Safety Claims: A Dangerous Game Played with Consumer Trust!
It appears that Chery has been caught in a web of questionable marketing, leading Global NCAP to issue a strong rebuke. The core issue? Chery's alleged use of crash test results that simply don't apply to the vehicles being sold in South Africa, creating a dangerously false impression of safety for consumers.
What the Crash Test Revealed: A Stark Reality
The independent crash test report paints a concerning picture. Here's a breakdown of the key findings:
- Structural Weakness: The footwell area and the bodyshell of the tested vehicle were found to be unstable. This means they weren't robust enough to handle further impact forces, raising serious questions about occupant protection in a real-world collision.
- Missing Critical Protection: A side pole impact test was notably absent. Why? Because the car does not offer standard side head protection for either the front or rear passengers. This is a significant omission, as it leaves heads vulnerable to severe injury, even from a relatively low-speed collision with a pole or a tree. But here's where it gets controversial: Is it acceptable for a vehicle to be sold without this fundamental safety feature as standard?
- Partial Safety Features: While Electronic Stability Control (ESC) was present and standard, and Seat Belt Reminders (SBRs) were available in all seating positions, these features did not meet Global NCAP's stringent requirements. This suggests that even the safety systems present might not offer the level of protection consumers expect.
The Deception Unveiled: Marketing vs. Reality
Global NCAP is calling out Chery for publishing media statements that leverage NCAP results from other markets, which are not relevant to the models available in South Africa. It's crucial to understand that NCAP assessments are market-specific. Using results selectively can lead to a false impression of safety performance, and this is precisely what Global NCAP believes Chery has done.
Richard Woods, CEO of Global NCAP, expressed his disappointment, stating, "A two-star rating for the Tiggo 7 Pro is very disappointing, but this poor result is seriously compounded by the publication of misleading information on crash test results from other markets. South African consumers need independent and accurate information to inform their purchasing decisions. Transparency and accountability on vehicle safety, not marketing smoke and mirrors."
Bobby Ramagwede, CEO of the Automobile Association of South Africa, echoed these concerns, highlighting that the local crash test was deemed "unsafe" and "misleading." He pointed out that media releases touting a five-star Euro NCAP rating for a different variant of the Tiggo 7 fail to mention the safety inadequacies of the entry-level models sold locally. He emphasized that for a rating to be recognized in South Africa, the vehicle needs to be assessed under the #SaferCarsForAfrica campaign.
The Bigger Picture: A Pattern of Inequality?
Ramagwede also touched upon a recurring issue: "vehicles sold in Africa do not offer the same safety performance as in other regions." He further noted a campaign to obscure the broader safety picture across a vehicle range. This raises a critical question: Should consumers in Africa be expected to accept lower safety standards than those in other parts of the world?
He passionately concluded, "South African motorists deserve better, irrespective of source or price point of a vehicle, with this two-star rating reinforcing the urgent need for all manufacturers to commit to equal safety for all markets." The AA firmly believes that no vehicle should be sold without side head protection for front and rear rows. Safety, they argue, should never be an optional extra, and certainly not a privilege reserved for markets outside Africa.
And this is the part most people miss: The Chery Tiggo 7 Pro was tested as part of the #SaferCarsForAfrica campaign, which aims to provide consumers with crucial safety information. The stark contrast between the marketed safety and the actual test results is a wake-up call.
What do you think? Are you concerned about potential disparities in vehicle safety standards across different regions? Do you believe manufacturers have a moral obligation to provide the same level of safety in all markets, regardless of price point? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
