Tesla Model Y
Reliability, NHTSA Complaints & Recall History

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Safety Recall

Using Tesla FSD (full self-driving supervised) I drove home, approximately 120 miles, from a family visit. From previous experience with Tesla FSD, I knew that the navigation system would navigate into the incorrect of 2 driveways (left, instead of the correct driveway, right) leading to my parking space. Therefore, upon arriving at the building address I endeavored to take over full control by tapping break and manually turning to the right driveway, whereupon the steering wheel locked up completely and the car lurched forward crashing through the security gate and into a parked car directly in line with how the locked steering directed it. To the best of my knowledge, the car was removed to a salvage location where it was considered a total loss.

The radiator for the car gets fully clogged with debris very easily. There is no screen mesh to protect the radiator from all the debris. The radiator then becomes clogged with debris in the fins and stops cooling correctly. This is not a serviceable item that an owner could accomplish. This should not have to be brought to the Tesla repair centers and be charged for a design flaw that will cause the car to overheat. There needs to be a simple small holed mesh placed in the front grill that owners can simply wipe off with their hands. Tesla states this is a maintenance item, but for how much it cost, most owners are not taking their cars in. Most owners dont even know about the problem. Also, most owners are not getting down on their hands and knees to look at the radiator or to even think about checking it. Large leafs easily get stuck and block most of the radiator.

I was at full stop on [XXX] facing [XXX] at a red traffic signal at intersection. Then while still at light which was red the vehicle unexpectedly accelerated toward [XXX] on its even with feet on brake, I attempted to maneuver to avoid colliding with vehicles traveling on [XXX] , then made a sharp right turn on sidewalk of [XXX] drove striking a "Bee Line Bus" sign located in front of [XXX] . I was able to maneuver not hitting any pedestrians and crashing vehicle out a brush on sidewalk without putting passengers/family in car at risk of injury INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Car was in FSD mode, backing out of a parking place very slowly when it accelerated and crashed into a post and wall. No other cars or people were involved, but no alarms, beeps, or warnings were sounded and the screen/monitor/camera systems went blank simultaneously. This caused over 5000 worth of damage per the estimate provided by the only body shop in the area allowed to fix Teslas. There is also a gap in saved data per our retrieval from the USB and camera installed in the vehicle.

Incident Summary: On April 1, 2026, while operating a 2025 Tesla Model Y at highway speeds (approx. 65-70 MPH), the front hood (frunk) spontaneously unlatched, flipped upward, and struck the windshield. The impact completely shattered the windshield, obstructed 100% of forward visibility, and caused structural damage to the hood and hinges. I was able to safely navigate to the shoulder by relying on side-view mirrors and lane-keep assist, but the incident constituted an immediate and life-threatening safety hazard. Failure of Safety Redundancies: Lack of Digital Warning: At no point prior to or during the drive did the vehicle’s software provide an "unlatched," "open," or "warning" notification on the primary display or via audible alert. The vehicle’s sensors failed to detect a compromised latch state. Secondary Latch Failure: The mechanical secondary safety catch, designed to prevent the hood from fully opening if the primary latch fails, did not engage or hold. The hood bypassed all mechanical and digital failsafes. Spontaneous Activation: The vehicle had not been manually accessed in the frunk area immediately prior to this trip, suggesting either a mechanical fatigue of the latch assembly or a software-commanded release error. Year/Make/Model: 2025 Tesla Model Y License Plate: [XXX] Previous Recalls: This failure appears identical in nature to NHTSA Recall 24V-554, which affected 2021-2024 models. It appears the remedy or part quality issues addressed in that recall may persist in the 2025 model year production. Safety Consequences: The sudden loss of visibility at high speeds on a congested highway created an extreme risk of a high-speed collision, multi-vehicle pileup, and potential fatality. The force of the hood striking the glass sent shards into the cabin. I am requesting an immediate investigation into the 2025 Model Y hood latch assemblies and sensor logic to determine if a new or expanded recall is necessary to prevent loss of life. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Full self driving (supervised) was active and functioning properly on interstate 70. The self-driving feature decided to move one lane over to the furthermost lane to the left. That lane was half covered with snow. The speed was approximately 65MPH When the front left wheel hit the snow the the car swerved to the right and hit the snow bank against the rail. I immediately steered to the right and could limit the damage Damage was not severe and I could drive the car to destination

I am filing a safety complaint regarding Tesla's removal of driver-controlled maximum speed in FSD (Supervised), a change that has alarmed a significant number of Tesla owners and safety-conscious drivers. Previous software allowed drivers to set a precise maximum speed via the steering wheel scroll wheel while FSD (Supervised) was active. Tesla replaced this with fixed "Speed Profiles" (Sloth, Chill, Standard, Hurry, Mad Max), none of which allow a driver to set a specific speed. Each profile operates at a programmed range relative to the posted speed limit. Even the slowest profile (Sloth) has been observed exceeding the speed limit. The system also frequently misreads posted limits entirely. This is a serious safety regression. In winter conditions, a cautious driver may need to travel well below the speed limit due to snow or black ice. Previously, they could reduce FSD's max speed precisely. That is no longer possible, the system determines speed, and the driver cannot override it downward while FSD remains engaged. This concern is not isolated to just me. Online forums and Tesla owner communities have seen widespread discussion and frustration over this change, with many drivers expressing that it has made them feel unsafe and less in control of their own vehicle. Removing precise speed control from a supervised autonomous system directly contradicts Tesla's stated position that the driver remains responsible for safe operation. This is an ongoing issue and not limited to a single date for the "Tell us the approximate date this incident occurred." I request NHTSA: 1. Investigate Tesla's removal of driver-adjustable maximum speed in FSD (Supervised); 2. Evaluate compliance with FMVSS and driver control guidelines for automated driving features; 3. Require Tesla to restore precise, driver-controlled maximum speed settings.

Following a "secondary" botched windshield replacement within 3 weeks performed by the Tesla Service Center in Carle Place, NY, my Tesla Model Y experienced a catastrophic structural water intrusion during rainfall. A great amounts of water dripping directly through the windshield seal into the cabin, soaking the dashboard electronics, floorboards, and much more water coming in from the brake pedal area while driving on LIE. While I was driving the vehicle with my three children in the back seat, this water intrusion triggered an active electrical short circuit. The vehicle's hazard lights began flashing autonomously, and the electrical system became severely compromised, creating an immediate and life-threatening safety hazard on the road. The vehicle is currently grounded, completely undrivable, and poses a continued electrical fire risk. Tesla Service has been notified in writing and has officially acknowledged via their app that the vehicle must be towed. This gross negligence in structural sealing has directly compromised the vehicle's electrical control modules, severely endangering the lives of the occupants."

On January 28, 2026, the vehicle (a Tesla Model Y) was operating with the Full Self-Driving (FSD) system actively engaged in normal highway traffic conditions. Without any prior warning messages, chimes, or system alerts, the FSD system abruptly disengaged approximately 1 second before the vehicle steered into a concrete road divider. Component failed: The Tesla Full Self-Driving (FSD) software and underlying perception/control systems failed to maintain the lane and abruptly handed over control with insufficient time to react. The vehicle and its data are available for inspection. Safety risk: The sudden, sub-second disengagement provided the driver with zero time to react, take manual control, or perform an evasive maneuver. This system failure directly resulted in a high-speed collision with a road divider, causing significant vehicle damage and physical injuries to the driver that required medical treatment. Inspection/Confirmation: The vehicle is currently subject to an open insurance claim and has been evaluated for repair. Warnings: There were no warning lamps, messages, or requests for the driver to take over prior to the immediate 1-second window before the crash. Evidence: I have downloaded and preserved the complete Event Data Record (EDR) and the multi-angle dashcam video files. The EDR data mathematically documents the sub-second disengagement, and the video files confirm normal traffic flow with no external hazards forcing the collision. I can provide the EDR PDF and video files to NHTSA investigators immediately upon request.

On February 11, 2026, the 2025 Tesla Model Y "Vision AutoPark" system initiated an uncommanded high-speed reverse acceleration into a stationary yellow concrete bollard in a parking lot. The vehicle's vision-only parking assist hardware failed to detect a clearly visible, fixed obstruction and displayed a clear path on the system interface immediately before impact. No warning lamps, chimes, messages, or other alerts preceded the failure. The system provided zero indication of the imminent collision. The vehicle closed the distance to the bollard in under one second, exceeding human reaction time and making manual braking intervention impossible before impact. This failure mode — autonomous acceleration toward a stationary object without detection or warning — creates a severe crush hazard for pedestrians and property. The vehicle and its onboard data logs are available for inspection upon request. High-definition video evidence of the failure has been preserved showing the system ignoring the visible obstacle. The problem has not been confirmed by a dealer. The manufacturer's service center refused to inspect the vehicle or review data logs on the date of the incident despite an immediate in-person request. The vehicle has not yet been inspected by insurance, police, or the manufacturer. The failed component is the Tesla Vision-only AutoPark system, including its camera-based object detection and autonomous vehicle control software.

Vehicle Information 2025 Tesla Model Y Approx. 30,000 miles Purchased new ~11 months ago Incident Description While driving at highway speed, the front trunk (frunk/hood) of my 2025 Tesla Model Y unexpectedly opened. The hood immediately flew upward, flipped backward over the windshield, and shattered the windshield. The frunk had not been opened in approximately two weeks prior to the incident. The vehicle had not undergone recent service or repair involving the hood or latch assembly. There were no prior warnings or alerts indicating that the frunk was unlatched or not latched properly before driving. The hood appeared fully closed prior to the trip. However, after the incident once we pulled over, a bolt was completely out of place, as shown in my video. Even if the primary latch was faulty, the secondary latch / catch should have prevented the hood from opening all the way and slamming the windshield. This failure to notify improper latching created an immediate and total obstruction of forward visibility at highway speed and posed a serious crash risk. The vehicle has approximately 30,000 miles and is less than one year old. Given Tesla’s prior recall related to hood latch detection issues, I am concerned that either: •The latch system failed mechanically, and/or •The vehicle failed to properly detect and warn of an unlatched hood. This is a significant safety event and could result in serious injury or death if it occurs in traffic.

A few weeks ago my seatbelt censor started acting up, and then two weeks later that my heater quit. They blamed Chewed wiring because of soy based coatings, and set its not in the warranty and accused rodent damage since the rear seat was eaten. I got the call during diagnosis demanding i bring the loaner car because they wanted $1,349.07 which i did not have because a 9/11 first responder and don't have other insurance accept mandated state minimums, they told me bring the loaner back, on the way home FSD worked till i got towards my putnam county rural route 22 when power steering FSD and power breaks died. I skidded at 25 mph managed to get to park and plug it and leaving it this. So the tech put the plugs together and made the situation worse by plugging chewed harness together. No heat, transport, no car, no door dash money for me, no medical appointment and cant risk losing all steering. When TESLA works, it works very and great car. had they refused to use soy coatings and stayed with rubber coatings this issue would not be here. how Many FSD crashes are result of rodent damage?

We are currently experiencing single-digit temperatures here in Pittsburgh. I placed my vehicle in “defrost” mode, and while it did clear the windshield, it also caused the glass to crack. I contacted Tesla and brought the vehicle in for an assessment, at which point I was informed the damage would not be covered. My car has only 14,000 miles and will be one year old next month. It is essentially brand new and has been meticulously maintained. There were no prior flaws or damage to the windshield. Despite this, Tesla refused coverage for what is a known issue: windshield cracking caused by defrost mode in extreme cold temperatures. This issue is widely documented online. Customer service confirmed that Tesla does not cover glass damage, even when it cracks spontaneously as a result of using defrost mode as intended. The quoted repair cost is $1,500. This experience reflects a lack of accountability and failure to stand behind the product.

All safety and most computer related features in the vehicle have failed. Cruise control, backup cameras, all other cameras, the navigation (assuming this is also impacting the projection of remaining battery life as my car always thinks it is at my home), warning signals for approaching obstacles/dangers, cruise control of any kind does now work, lane departure warning has failed, and automatic windshield wipers do not work. This happened without warning and was not related to an update. On January 13, 2026, the car worked in the morning and then all of these issues started happening. I made a Tesla service appointment, but they are not able to see me until February 3, 2026.

On January 17, 2026 the vehicle self-accelerated when put in reverse and crashed into a parked truck. This was the second time this occurred. The prior incident occurred on November 29, 2025 when backing out of the garage at our home. The new incident occurred the FIRST time we put the car in reverse after receiving it back after repair from the prior accident (we received it on January 15. 2026 and this was the first time we drove it since then). We had driven the car forward with the full self driving feature turned on and engaged (part of the time and part manually) without incident. However when placed in reverse with the full delf driving turned on but not enagaged the car "took off." It is only through good fortune no one was seriously injured or killed. Self acceleration in reverse only occurred after the vehicle was serviced by Tesla to repair the full self driving system which, at that time, would only engage intermittently.

On or about May 23 or 24, 2025, while using FSD to park the vehicle, I engaged reverse mode. The vehicle was fully under FSD control during this maneuver. Unexpectedly, the car reversed into a fixed pole, impacting the rear of the vehicle and causing a noticeable dent. The system did detect the collision and stopped upon impact, but failed to avoid it entirely. This incident occurred despite my hands being on the wheel and full attention as a supervising driver, in accordance with Tesla's guidelines for FSD use. I believe this represents a malfunction in the FSD system's object detection or path planning during reverse parking.

Tesla Supervised Self Driving (FSSD) update 14 removed the ability for the vehicle operator to set speed targets. Additionally, their system is unable to accurately determine speed limits for many roadways. The discrepancy between FSSDs perceived speed limit and actual speed limit can be as much at +/- 25mph. The discrepancy can occur suddenly and at any time during a drive, even on stretches of road with a consistent speed limit. This results in moments of dangerous acceleration and/or deceleration that is not requested by the vehicle operator or can be reasonably anticipated. This causes erratic driving behavior to both the Tesla and to other motorist in the vicinity. Erratic, unpredictable driving is a major cause of traffic accidents that can lead to serious damage, injury, or death. Prior versions allowed the operator to set a speed target, similar to standard cruise control, that the vehicle attempted to maintain and would not exceed. FSSD v14 does not allow the vehicle operator to have any control over the speed of the vehicle to any degree that meaningfully contributes towards safe, legal driving.

Passenger side airbag did not deploy. Emergency auto brake did not seem to work. The passenger side of the vehicle was struck by other car at high speed and sustained significant damage

I swerved in the road in the back passenger seat seatbelt came unbuckled with a car seat in the car in the car seat came out

Date: December 28, 2025 Time: Approximately 3:25 PM Vehicle: 2026 Tesla Model Y Incident Location: Southbound on the I-35N feeder road, just north of Highway 114. Safe Harbor Location: Burger King (15925 N Hwy 114, Northlake, TX) Statement of Facts: I was driving my 2026 Tesla Model Y southbound on the I-35N feeder road at approximately 3:25 PM today. I was traveling at a steady speed of 55 MPH. Without any warning chime or dashboard notification, the front hood (frunk) suddenly and violently flew open. The hood slammed into the windshield, shattering the glass across my entire field of vision and completely obstructing the road ahead. I was forced to perform an emergency "blind" stop on the feeder road. Once the vehicle was under control, I drove at approximately 10 MPH with zero forward visibility to reach a safe location off the main road. I pulled into the Burger King parking lot located at the intersection of I-35 and Highway 114 to inspect the damage and call for assistance. Key Safety Failures: • Software Failure: At no point before the hood flew open did the vehicle alert me that the frunk was unlatched. • Mechanical Failure: The latching mechanism failed to hold at standard highway speeds, creating a life-threatening visibility hazard. • Structural Damage: The windshield is fully shattered, and the hood and hinges are visibly warped from the force of the impact. Conclusion: This incident was a catastrophic safety failure. Given Tesla's history of recalls for this exact issue (NHTSA Recall 24V-554), it is clear that this 2026 model either suffers from the same defect or the previous "software fix" is insufficient to protect drivers.