2017 TESLA MODEL S

The charge port latch failed to release the mobile connector (consistent with TSB SB-18-44-002) I had to call Tesla customer service for manual release instructions, which was very difficult to get through to (unclear through the Tesla App) After manual release, the mobile connector was damaged since it got stuck during a rainstorm. Tesla replaced the entire charging port for ~$1,000 without first testing the mobile connector Though a known defect, TSB SB-18-44-002 was never applied to my vehicle and since my vehicle was out of warranty, I was charge for the full replacement of the charging port. I was put at risk because I was stranded with a charging port cable unable to release from my vehicle and unable to drive.

I am reporting a serious safety defect regarding the front control arms on my 2017 Tesla Model S (VIN: [XXX] ). The front control arm bushings are failing, with visible cracking and tearing, as documented by a certified mechanic. These failures directly compromise vehicle steering, handling, and safety, creating a high risk of loss of control or accident. Tesla has issued a known service bulletin related to this issue, yet refused to perform repairs free of charge, despite acknowledging the bulletin exists. Timeline of Communications and Attempts to Resolve: Dec 2015 – First reported issue to Tesla Service Center. Inspection was refused without a payment of $270. Tesla claimed the vehicle was out of warranty and refused free inspection or repair. Independent Mechanic Inspection – Confirmed front control arm bushings are cracked/ripped; photos were taken. Dec 27, 2025 – Email sent to [XXX] . Received a call from a local Tesla center stating nothing could be done because the car was out of warranty. I explained it is a safety issue, but it was disregarded. Jan 10 and Jan 18, 2026 – Follow-up emails sent to [XXX] , but no response was received. Jan 23, 2026 – Email sent to [XXX] , documenting safety concerns and service bulletin reference; no acknowledgment or response was received. I and Tesla have all the emails amd photos but unfortunately I was nit able to attach. If requested I can email or fi d out ways to shareholders. Please let me know. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

I pulled into a parking lot, and noticed that my passenger side rear wheel was leaning into the car. Luckily I was next to a Firestone and the mechanic told me the rear control arm broke off. Had I have been driving even for 2 more minutes, the wheel would have came off completely. When I pulled in, there was no noise, vibration, or any other indication that something was wrong. I know for a fact I didnt hit any curbs or large potholes. It was a normal drive.

CRITICAL SAFETY FAILURE: Loss of Driver Override and Extreme HMI/Signaling Latency. 1. Loss of Override & Unintended Acceleration: While operating FSD (Supervised), the vehicle ignored a 65 mph set-point and accelerated to 80 mph. I attempted to reduce speed by pulling down on the steering stalk 4-5 times, but the vehicle ignored all manual inputs, requiring a hard disengagement. 2. Lane Departure / Path Failure: The vehicle failed to maintain lane centering, specifically crossing over the centerline into opposing traffic. This occured without warning or system-initiated steering alerts 3. False Signaling / Path Failure: I’ve seen at least two occurrences where system exhibits dangerous signaling conflicts, such as activating a right-turn signal while simultaneously executing a left-turn maneuver. One time it was on a 45–55 mph rural corridor where trailing drivers frequently overtake slower vehicles. A false right-turn signal acts as a dangerous "all-clear" for a trailing driver to pass on the left, creating a high- probability broadside collision scenario when the Tesla physically executes its left turn. I have no idea if this has occurred more than these two times as I don’t check this. The other time I caught on video, by chance, as I was trying to capture the surging behavior to show the Tesla service center 4. Audio & Visual HMI Latency: Audible instructions arrive 100+ feet after turns, and the map UI auto-zooms away from the driver’s focus, requiring constant manual screen contact to view street names. This forces significant Visual-Manual Distraction. 5. Confirmed Inadequacy: Tesla Service Invoice #[XXX] (Jan 27, 2025) documents: 'The current computer is a little too slow for full self driving function...' confirming the hardware is unfit for safety-critical processing. This incident is directly relevant to NHTSA Investigation PE25012. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

CRITICAL SAFETY FAILURE: Loss of Driver Override and Extreme HMI/Signaling Latency. 1. Loss of Override & Unintended Acceleration: While operating FSD (Supervised), the vehicle ignored a 65 mph set-point and accelerated to 80 mph. I attempted to reduce speed by pulling down on the steering stalk 4-5 times, but the vehicle ignored all manual inputs, requiring a hard disengagement. 2. Lane Departure / Path Failure: The vehicle failed to maintain lane centering, specifically crossing over the centerline into opposing traffic. This occured without warning or system-initiated steering alerts 3. False Signaling / Path Failure: I’ve seen at least two occurrences where system exhibits dangerous signaling conflicts, such as activating a right-turn signal while simultaneously executing a left-turn maneuver. One time it was on a 45–55 mph rural corridor where trailing drivers frequently overtake slower vehicles. A false right-turn signal acts as a dangerous "all-clear" for a trailing driver to pass on the left, creating a high- probability broadside collision scenario when the Tesla physically executes its left turn. I have no idea if this has occurred more than these two times as I don’t check this. The other time I caught on video, by chance, as I was trying to capture the surging behavior to show the Tesla service center 4. Audio & Visual HMI Latency: Audible instructions arrive 100+ feet after turns, and the map UI auto-zooms away from the driver’s focus, requiring constant manual screen contact to view street names. This forces significant Visual-Manual Distraction. 5. Confirmed Inadequacy: Tesla Service Invoice #[XXX] (Jan 27, 2025) documents: 'The current computer is a little too slow for full self driving function...' confirming the hardware is unfit for safety-critical processing. This incident is directly relevant to NHTSA Investigation PE25012. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

CRITICAL SAFETY FAILURE: Loss of Driver Override and Extreme HMI/Signaling Latency. 1. Loss of Override & Unintended Acceleration: While operating FSD (Supervised), the vehicle ignored a 65 mph set-point and accelerated to 80 mph. I attempted to reduce speed by pulling down on the steering stalk 4-5 times, but the vehicle ignored all manual inputs, requiring a hard disengagement. 2. Lane Departure / Path Failure: The vehicle failed to maintain lane centering, specifically crossing over the centerline into opposing traffic. This occured without warning or system-initiated steering alerts 3. False Signaling / Path Failure: I’ve seen at least two occurrences where system exhibits dangerous signaling conflicts, such as activating a right-turn signal while simultaneously executing a left-turn maneuver. One time it was on a 45–55 mph rural corridor where trailing drivers frequently overtake slower vehicles. A false right-turn signal acts as a dangerous "all-clear" for a trailing driver to pass on the left, creating a high- probability broadside collision scenario when the Tesla physically executes its left turn. I have no idea if this has occurred more than these two times as I don’t check this. The other time I caught on video, by chance, as I was trying to capture the surging behavior to show the Tesla service center 4. Audio & Visual HMI Latency: Audible instructions arrive 100+ feet after turns, and the map UI auto-zooms away from the driver’s focus, requiring constant manual screen contact to view street names. This forces significant Visual-Manual Distraction. 5. Confirmed Inadequacy: Tesla Service Invoice #[XXX] (Jan 27, 2025) documents: 'The current computer is a little too slow for full self driving function...' confirming the hardware is unfit for safety-critical processing. This incident is directly relevant to NHTSA Investigation PE25012. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

The contact owned a 2017 Tesla Model S. The contact stated that while starting the vehicle, an Autopilot disabled warning message system was displayed a day prior. The contact reached out to the Tesla hotline for assistance regarding the failure. The contact was advised to continue driving the vehicle, and the system error message was expected to clear. The contact stated that after multiple drives, the warning message did not disappear. The contact stated that while coming to a stop, the brake system became inoperable. The contact stated that the vehicle then accelerated to approximately 35 MPH, causing the contact to rear-end another vehicle. Multiple warning messages were displayed, including: traction and stability control disabled, automatic emergency braking system fault, battery management system critical fault, and electrical system reduced, as reported through Tesla chat assistance. The contact also stated that all air bags deployed. No injuries were sustained, and no medical attention was provided. A police report was filed. The vehicle was towed and deemed a total loss. The dealer was contacted; however, the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 98,787.

This is a supplemental filing to my prior NHTSA complaint (#11697718) regarding a high-voltage isolation fault and shutdown risk. The vehicle displayed warnings including “vehicle may shut down during driving,” “may not charge,” and repeated BMS isolation fault messages. It became inoperable at a public charging station. The manufacturer confirmed isolation faults in the drive unit and the A/C compressor. Their own service notes stated that the vehicle “may shut down during regular driving” and that charging “may not be safe.” Despite this, the vehicle was left at 0% state of charge for an extended period and then charged by the manufacturer. They later stated to a regulator that the vehicle was “trickle charged at 1 amp for 6 hours,” but the vehicle’s range increased by approximately 100 miles, which is not physically possible at that charging current (1 amp at 240V for 6 hours = 1.44 kWh ≈ 4–5 miles). This discrepancy suggests the vehicle may have been charged at a higher rate than claimed and without proper cooling, despite the documented A/C failure that is necessary for battery thermal management. Battery condition is unknown because the manufacturer refused to perform or provide a battery health analysis, isolation resistance values, thermal logs, or charging session data. The safety defect could not be verified as repaired. While this safety issue remained unresolved, the manufacturer rejected a Tesla roadside tow arranged under regulator instruction to second service center and instead arranged an unauthorized tow to remove the vehicle from their facility without my consent. The vehicle was taken to a non-manufacturer storage lot while still in an unsafe state. I am concerned about: • high-voltage isolation faults, • shutdown risk during driving, • unsafe charging performed by the manufacturer, • possible battery damage from low SOC and charging without A/C cooling, and • mishandling of an active safety defect. The vehicle is available for inspection.

This is a supplemental filing to my prior NHTSA complaint (#11697718) regarding a high-voltage isolation fault and shutdown risk. The vehicle displayed warnings including “vehicle may shut down during driving,” “may not charge,” and repeated BMS isolation fault messages. It became inoperable at a public charging station. The manufacturer confirmed isolation faults in the drive unit and the A/C compressor. Their own service notes stated that the vehicle “may shut down during regular driving” and that charging “may not be safe.” Despite this, the vehicle was left at 0% state of charge for an extended period and then charged by the manufacturer. They later stated to a regulator that the vehicle was “trickle charged at 1 amp for 6 hours,” but the vehicle’s range increased by approximately 100 miles, which is not physically possible at that charging current (1 amp at 240V for 6 hours = 1.44 kWh ≈ 4–5 miles). This discrepancy suggests the vehicle may have been charged at a higher rate than claimed and without proper cooling, despite the documented A/C failure that is necessary for battery thermal management. Battery condition is unknown because the manufacturer refused to perform or provide a battery health analysis, isolation resistance values, thermal logs, or charging session data. The safety defect could not be verified as repaired. While this safety issue remained unresolved, the manufacturer rejected a Tesla roadside tow arranged under regulator instruction to second service center and instead arranged an unauthorized tow to remove the vehicle from their facility without my consent. The vehicle was taken to a non-manufacturer storage lot while still in an unsafe state. I am concerned about: • high-voltage isolation faults, • shutdown risk during driving, • unsafe charging performed by the manufacturer, • possible battery damage from low SOC and charging without A/C cooling, and • mishandling of an active safety defect. The vehicle is available for inspection.

This is a supplemental filing to my prior NHTSA complaint (#11697718) regarding a high-voltage isolation fault and shutdown risk. The vehicle displayed warnings including “vehicle may shut down during driving,” “may not charge,” and repeated BMS isolation fault messages. It became inoperable at a public charging station. The manufacturer confirmed isolation faults in the drive unit and the A/C compressor. Their own service notes stated that the vehicle “may shut down during regular driving” and that charging “may not be safe.” Despite this, the vehicle was left at 0% state of charge for an extended period and then charged by the manufacturer. They later stated to a regulator that the vehicle was “trickle charged at 1 amp for 6 hours,” but the vehicle’s range increased by approximately 100 miles, which is not physically possible at that charging current (1 amp at 240V for 6 hours = 1.44 kWh ≈ 4–5 miles). This discrepancy suggests the vehicle may have been charged at a higher rate than claimed and without proper cooling, despite the documented A/C failure that is necessary for battery thermal management. Battery condition is unknown because the manufacturer refused to perform or provide a battery health analysis, isolation resistance values, thermal logs, or charging session data. The safety defect could not be verified as repaired. While this safety issue remained unresolved, the manufacturer rejected a Tesla roadside tow arranged under regulator instruction to second service center and instead arranged an unauthorized tow to remove the vehicle from their facility without my consent. The vehicle was taken to a non-manufacturer storage lot while still in an unsafe state. I am concerned about: • high-voltage isolation faults, • shutdown risk during driving, • unsafe charging performed by the manufacturer, • possible battery damage from low SOC and charging without A/C cooling, and • mishandling of an active safety defect. The vehicle is available for inspection.

I am reporting multiple safety-related defects on my 2017 Tesla Model S (VIN [XXX] ) that were present at the time of purchase but not disclosed by the selling dealer (Starling Ford, Titusville, FL). A certified independent EV repair facility (The Electrified Garage) inspected the vehicle on 11/17/2025 and documented the following safety defects: • failing/worn suspension components (control arms, thrust arms, cracked bushings) • torn sway-bar link boots • inoperative right-rear window regulator • driver window contacting internal wiring harness • moisture in the rear inner tail lamp • previous A/C drain blockage causing interior water intrusion These issues pose risks related to steering stability, electrical safety, visibility, and structural integrity. All of these conditions existed prior to the sale and were not disclosed. I am requesting NHTSA to log this complaint for federal safety review as these defects involve suspension, electrical moisture intrusion, and visibility issues that may impact the safe operation of the vehicle. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

I am reporting multiple safety-related defects on my 2017 Tesla Model S (VIN [XXX] ) that were present at the time of purchase but not disclosed by the selling dealer (Starling Ford, Titusville, FL). A certified independent EV repair facility (The Electrified Garage) inspected the vehicle on 11/17/2025 and documented the following safety defects: • failing/worn suspension components (control arms, thrust arms, cracked bushings) • torn sway-bar link boots • inoperative right-rear window regulator • driver window contacting internal wiring harness • moisture in the rear inner tail lamp • previous A/C drain blockage causing interior water intrusion These issues pose risks related to steering stability, electrical safety, visibility, and structural integrity. All of these conditions existed prior to the sale and were not disclosed. I am requesting NHTSA to log this complaint for federal safety review as these defects involve suspension, electrical moisture intrusion, and visibility issues that may impact the safe operation of the vehicle. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

I am reporting multiple safety-related defects on my 2017 Tesla Model S (VIN [XXX] ) that were present at the time of purchase but not disclosed by the selling dealer (Starling Ford, Titusville, FL). A certified independent EV repair facility (The Electrified Garage) inspected the vehicle on 11/17/2025 and documented the following safety defects: • failing/worn suspension components (control arms, thrust arms, cracked bushings) • torn sway-bar link boots • inoperative right-rear window regulator • driver window contacting internal wiring harness • moisture in the rear inner tail lamp • previous A/C drain blockage causing interior water intrusion These issues pose risks related to steering stability, electrical safety, visibility, and structural integrity. All of these conditions existed prior to the sale and were not disclosed. I am requesting NHTSA to log this complaint for federal safety review as these defects involve suspension, electrical moisture intrusion, and visibility issues that may impact the safe operation of the vehicle. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Upon purchasing the vehicle, I discovered multiple critical safety defects that were not disclosed at the time of sale and were confirmed by an independent EV specialist (Electrified Garage). These defects include worn and failing front and rear suspension components (control arms, thrust arms, and cracked/damaged bushings), a failing sway bar link boot, and a malfunctioning window that makes contact with the internal wiring harness. The suspension defects create instability over bumps and uneven roads, producing clunks, shifting, and vibration that affect steering control and overall stability. These issues present a risk of suspension failure while driving, which could cause loss of control. The window/wiring contact also poses a potential electrical hazard if the harness becomes damaged. The independent inspection documented that these defects existed before I took possession of the vehicle. The dealer did not disclose any of these issues, and the defects were not visible during a standard test drive. I am reporting this because the suspension defects directly affect vehicle handling, safety, and crash-avoidance capability. I want NHTSA to be aware in case similar defects appear in other vehicles of the same model/year.

Upon purchasing the vehicle, I discovered multiple critical safety defects that were not disclosed at the time of sale and were confirmed by an independent EV specialist (Electrified Garage). These defects include worn and failing front and rear suspension components (control arms, thrust arms, and cracked/damaged bushings), a failing sway bar link boot, and a malfunctioning window that makes contact with the internal wiring harness. The suspension defects create instability over bumps and uneven roads, producing clunks, shifting, and vibration that affect steering control and overall stability. These issues present a risk of suspension failure while driving, which could cause loss of control. The window/wiring contact also poses a potential electrical hazard if the harness becomes damaged. The independent inspection documented that these defects existed before I took possession of the vehicle. The dealer did not disclose any of these issues, and the defects were not visible during a standard test drive. I am reporting this because the suspension defects directly affect vehicle handling, safety, and crash-avoidance capability. I want NHTSA to be aware in case similar defects appear in other vehicles of the same model/year.

This is an update to NHTSA Complaint #XXX with new safety information. My 2017 Tesla Model S (VIN [XXX] ) has a confirmed high-voltage isolation fault. Tesla replaced the rear drive unit under warranty, but Tesla’s own technician notes now state: “There is a risk of isolation alerts reoccurring during regular driving, use of HVAC system, or DC charging.” “Vehicle may power off due to isolation faults when the air conditioning is used.” This is Tesla acknowledging in writing that the vehicle may shut off during normal driving, even after repair. This presents a serious crash risk. The original failure occurred during Supercharging, with warnings including: • “Electrical system power reduced — vehicle may shut down unexpectedly” • “Vehicle may not restart” • “Air conditioning reduced — DC charging reduced” Tesla reproduced the isolation fault during diagnosis. Even after replacing the rear drive unit, Tesla documented that the isolation defect still exists and prevents a battery health check or DC fast-charge validation. Tesla has attempted to return the vehicle to me in this unsafe condition, while admitting the defect persists. They also stated they may charge storage fees or tow the vehicle, despite the unresolved safety issue. The defect affects the HV bus and can cause loss of propulsion, shutdown during driving, and charging failure. Tesla has not provided numeric test results (megohm isolation readings, insulation tests, or validation data) proving the vehicle is safe. This is an ongoing, manufacturer-confirmed HV isolation defect that can lead to sudden power loss. I request NHTSA review Tesla’s handling of this issue and link this filing to Case #XXX. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

This is an update to NHTSA Complaint #XXX with new safety information. My 2017 Tesla Model S (VIN [XXX] ) has a confirmed high-voltage isolation fault. Tesla replaced the rear drive unit under warranty, but Tesla’s own technician notes now state: “There is a risk of isolation alerts reoccurring during regular driving, use of HVAC system, or DC charging.” “Vehicle may power off due to isolation faults when the air conditioning is used.” This is Tesla acknowledging in writing that the vehicle may shut off during normal driving, even after repair. This presents a serious crash risk. The original failure occurred during Supercharging, with warnings including: • “Electrical system power reduced — vehicle may shut down unexpectedly” • “Vehicle may not restart” • “Air conditioning reduced — DC charging reduced” Tesla reproduced the isolation fault during diagnosis. Even after replacing the rear drive unit, Tesla documented that the isolation defect still exists and prevents a battery health check or DC fast-charge validation. Tesla has attempted to return the vehicle to me in this unsafe condition, while admitting the defect persists. They also stated they may charge storage fees or tow the vehicle, despite the unresolved safety issue. The defect affects the HV bus and can cause loss of propulsion, shutdown during driving, and charging failure. Tesla has not provided numeric test results (megohm isolation readings, insulation tests, or validation data) proving the vehicle is safe. This is an ongoing, manufacturer-confirmed HV isolation defect that can lead to sudden power loss. I request NHTSA review Tesla’s handling of this issue and link this filing to Case #XXX. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

This is an update to NHTSA Complaint #XXX with new safety information. My 2017 Tesla Model S (VIN [XXX] ) has a confirmed high-voltage isolation fault. Tesla replaced the rear drive unit under warranty, but Tesla’s own technician notes now state: “There is a risk of isolation alerts reoccurring during regular driving, use of HVAC system, or DC charging.” “Vehicle may power off due to isolation faults when the air conditioning is used.” This is Tesla acknowledging in writing that the vehicle may shut off during normal driving, even after repair. This presents a serious crash risk. The original failure occurred during Supercharging, with warnings including: • “Electrical system power reduced — vehicle may shut down unexpectedly” • “Vehicle may not restart” • “Air conditioning reduced — DC charging reduced” Tesla reproduced the isolation fault during diagnosis. Even after replacing the rear drive unit, Tesla documented that the isolation defect still exists and prevents a battery health check or DC fast-charge validation. Tesla has attempted to return the vehicle to me in this unsafe condition, while admitting the defect persists. They also stated they may charge storage fees or tow the vehicle, despite the unresolved safety issue. The defect affects the HV bus and can cause loss of propulsion, shutdown during driving, and charging failure. Tesla has not provided numeric test results (megohm isolation readings, insulation tests, or validation data) proving the vehicle is safe. This is an ongoing, manufacturer-confirmed HV isolation defect that can lead to sudden power loss. I request NHTSA review Tesla’s handling of this issue and link this filing to Case #XXX. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

While charging at a Tesla Supercharger, the vehicle began making extremely loud mechanical noises on October 7, 2025, as if something inside the high-voltage system was about to explode. A warning appeared stating “Vehicle may shut down at any time.” A service request was opened the next day. Tesla scheduled the first available appointment nearly a month later, leaving the vehicle unsafe to drive. Before that appointment date, on October 31, 2025, the vehicle completely shut down at a Supercharger and could not be restarted. Tesla Roadside Assistance was dispatched three times before the car was successfully towed to a Tesla Service Center. The failure was diagnosed by the service center as a high-voltage isolation fault logged in the Battery Management System. The problem disables the vehicle suddenly and without warning, posing a serious safety hazard if it occurs while driving. Warning lamps and shutdown messages were present prior to the failure. Tesla service staff stated they could not access diagnostic data until the customer paid for unrelated parts (12-volt battery and A/C compressor). After being challenged, they later retrieved limited battery data proving that the high-voltage system had recorded faults. Tesla has not yet issued a written warranty determination or performed a full battery inspection. The incident demonstrates that a high-voltage battery isolation fault can cause the vehicle to become completely inoperable and may create risk of sudden loss of power while driving or charging. The component (battery pack and related electrical systems) remains in Tesla’s possession and can be inspected upon request.

I have documented examples of 3 total incidents now where a Tesla OTA "Update" on my vehicle caused a safety issue. Event 1: Nov 27, 2025. Tesla OTA Update renders my left turn light non-functional for ~24 hours. Resolution per forums only was to not touch the card for 24 hours to allow it to shift into "sleep" mode which would resolve the issue. Instructions were that only a service center could resolve the issue. Event 2: Sept 3, 2025. Tesla OTA Update renders my car unable to charge. The issue is resolved following a ~24 hour "sleep" cycle which allows my car to somehow resume charging. Telsa advised the only resolution was to come in for service and to replace a $3000 part. Event 3: Sept 23, 2025. Tesla OTA Update once again renders my car unable to use it's left turn light. Power cycling the vehicle was able to resolve the issue but once again the instructions was only that service could resolve the issue. Each "update" risks sigificant "safety" related issues and Tesla's only resolution is to pay hundreds of dollars for someone to "troubleshoot" that which shouldn't be a problem.

Software version 2025.32.3.1. Using Tesla’s auto-steer / enhanced autopilot (not fsd) causes many “phantom braking” events when going through several intersections on my commute. It’ll say a message “Curve Assist Active”, however I’ll be on a very straight and flat road with no curves. It’s 65 mph road and it will brake / slow down the car very hard and fast, if I don’t catch it in time it’ll get down to ~45 mph within a second. Even when traffic is going slow already, like 40 mph, it’ll still bring up the message and try to brake and slow down, though not as hard. Typically to about 25-30 mph. I usually can catch it and use the accelerator to prevent it, but sometimes it’ll happen so sudden and I worry about getting rear-ended by someone behind me. Very repeatable. Very startling and concerning when it happens when I don’t expect it to. I believe it’s a mapping issue as it has not been fixed in over a year and after several software updates.

I have documented examples of 3 total incidents now where a Tesla OTA "Update" on my vehicle caused a safety issue. Event 1: Nov 27, 2025. Tesla OTA Update renders my left turn light non-functional for ~24 hours. Resolution per forums only was to not touch the card for 24 hours to allow it to shift into "sleep" mode which would resolve the issue. Instructions were that only a service center could resolve the issue. Event 2: Sept 3, 2025. Tesla OTA Update renders my car unable to charge. The issue is resolved following a ~24 hour "sleep" cycle which allows my car to somehow resume charging. Telsa advised the only resolution was to come in for service and to replace a $3000 part. Event 3: Sept 23, 2025. Tesla OTA Update once again renders my car unable to use it's left turn light. Power cycling the vehicle was able to resolve the issue but once again the instructions was only that service could resolve the issue. Each "update" risks sigificant "safety" related issues and Tesla's only resolution is to pay hundreds of dollars for someone to "troubleshoot" that which shouldn't be a problem.

The contact owns a 2017 Tesla Model S. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the Forward Collision Avoidance system became inoperable. There was no warning light illuminated. The contact stated that the Forward Collision Avoidance feature failed to activate, almost resulting in a crash with another vehicle. Additionally, the contact stated that the back over collision avoidance system was inoperable. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, where it was determined that the front radar and bracket had failed and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact expressed a concern that the failure posed a significant safety hazard, as the Forward Collision Avoidance was inoperable. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 66,573.

During a road accident, Driver airbags were deployed and caused injuries to driver in left hand, left leg and right chest by flying debris’s due to airbag deployment.

Tesla originally confirmed issues with the MCU1 system in my vehicle and upgraded it to MCU2. I Paid $1,599 for the repair/upgrade. Since then, the center screen has continued shutting off while driving. When this happens, the instrument cluster and controls go dark, I cannot see my speed, use the blinkers to signal, operate the AC/defroster, or access other critical vehicle functions. This has occurred multiple times on highways, including US-22 in New Jersey, which created serious danger because I could not monitor speed or signal properly. Although Tesla addressed the MCU1 problem by upgrading me to MCU2, they told me afterward the vehicle was still “safe to drive,” despite the failures continuing. I believe this is unsafe because I lose visibility of all driving information and access to basic controls. Tesla now refuses to repair these ongoing problems. After I raised complaints about the severity of the issue, I was dismissed and mocked for my speech disability during phone calls, and Tesla placed me on a service restriction. As a result, I am unable to obtain further repairs for this safety defect. I am afraid to drive the car. No Adaptive Cruise Control, Automatic Emergency Braking, Blind Spot Warning, Forward Collision Warning, Lane Departure Warning, Lane Keeping Assistance, Parking Collision Warning, or Rear Cross Traffic Warning features were involved in this failure.

Tesla originally confirmed issues with the MCU1 system in my vehicle and upgraded it to MCU2. I Paid $1,599 for the repair/upgrade. Since then, the center screen has continued shutting off while driving. When this happens, the instrument cluster and controls go dark, I cannot see my speed, use the blinkers to signal, operate the AC/defroster, or access other critical vehicle functions. This has occurred multiple times on highways, including US-22 in New Jersey, which created serious danger because I could not monitor speed or signal properly. Although Tesla addressed the MCU1 problem by upgrading me to MCU2, they told me afterward the vehicle was still “safe to drive,” despite the failures continuing. I believe this is unsafe because I lose visibility of all driving information and access to basic controls. Tesla now refuses to repair these ongoing problems. After I raised complaints about the severity of the issue, I was dismissed and mocked for my speech disability during phone calls, and Tesla placed me on a service restriction. As a result, I am unable to obtain further repairs for this safety defect. I am afraid to drive the car. No Adaptive Cruise Control, Automatic Emergency Braking, Blind Spot Warning, Forward Collision Warning, Lane Departure Warning, Lane Keeping Assistance, Parking Collision Warning, or Rear Cross Traffic Warning features were involved in this failure.

Tesla originally confirmed issues with the MCU1 system in my vehicle and upgraded it to MCU2. I Paid $1,599 for the repair/upgrade. Since then, the center screen has continued shutting off while driving. When this happens, the instrument cluster and controls go dark, I cannot see my speed, use the blinkers to signal, operate the AC/defroster, or access other critical vehicle functions. This has occurred multiple times on highways, including US-22 in New Jersey, which created serious danger because I could not monitor speed or signal properly. Although Tesla addressed the MCU1 problem by upgrading me to MCU2, they told me afterward the vehicle was still “safe to drive,” despite the failures continuing. I believe this is unsafe because I lose visibility of all driving information and access to basic controls. Tesla now refuses to repair these ongoing problems. After I raised complaints about the severity of the issue, I was dismissed and mocked for my speech disability during phone calls, and Tesla placed me on a service restriction. As a result, I am unable to obtain further repairs for this safety defect. I am afraid to drive the car. No Adaptive Cruise Control, Automatic Emergency Braking, Blind Spot Warning, Forward Collision Warning, Lane Departure Warning, Lane Keeping Assistance, Parking Collision Warning, or Rear Cross Traffic Warning features were involved in this failure.

While merging onto the highway an error message showed up on the dash stating "Steering Assist May be Reduced" upon immediately after the steering froze and could only be moved slightly using significant force. Approx. 75lbs. I am athletic and work out and had trouble moving the car to the side. If my wife or daughter had driven the car they would not have been able to steer and this could have caused a significant accident, injury or death. Upon pulling over, I rebooted both computers on the Tesla Model S 75 D and the problem went away. I immediately drove to the Tesla dealer in Chesterfield, MO. There they seemed unconcerned, and advised me it was likely just a firmware issue and wouldn't be able to look at the car until the next week. I was shocked. Since the systems seemed to work I drove home and parked the car. On the driveway, the same error showed up and steering seemed again to lock up. After rebooting problem went away. Looking at the Tesla forums this seems to have happened before and poses a serious danger to the driver, occupants and fellow drivers on the road. I no longer feel safe driving the car.

While merging onto the highway an error message showed up on the dash stating "Steering Assist May be Reduced" upon immediately after the steering froze and could only be moved slightly using significant force. Approx. 75lbs. I am athletic and work out and had trouble moving the car to the side. If my wife or daughter had driven the car they would not have been able to steer and this could have caused a significant accident, injury or death. Upon pulling over, I rebooted both computers on the Tesla Model S 75 D and the problem went away. I immediately drove to the Tesla dealer in Chesterfield, MO. There they seemed unconcerned, and advised me it was likely just a firmware issue and wouldn't be able to look at the car until the next week. I was shocked. Since the systems seemed to work I drove home and parked the car. On the driveway, the same error showed up and steering seemed again to lock up. After rebooting problem went away. Looking at the Tesla forums this seems to have happened before and poses a serious danger to the driver, occupants and fellow drivers on the road. I no longer feel safe driving the car.

The intermediate steering shaft is binding, causing difficulty turning the wheel and inconsistent steering wheel feel. It often will cause the full self driving to disengage during turns Tesla has revised the part that now includes a protective rubber bootyet has not issued a recall as the part accumulates debris and rust out and binding the universal joint

As I was driving down my driveway to the street the power steering failed. It was extremely difficult to then steer. My wife would have been unable to. I was able to re-enter the driveway, with GREAT difficulty from which the car was towed on a flatbed to the local Tesla service center. Had I been on busy city streets of highway I fear what would have happened. The service center cited the failure of a fuse ( fuse part # FUSE,BF180A,32V; #1071379-80-A) Though the car is a 2017 model the odometer shows 42,302 miles. I don’t know if this a systematic issue but I view it as a safety issue and so am reporting it.

Using software version 2025.14.1 with FSD (Full Self Driving) version 12.6.4. About 50% of the time the vehicle attempts and fails to change lanes when using FSD. It will: 1. Turn on signal and not change lanes, confusing cars around me. Or more often 2. Swerve between lanes indefinitely. See example at [XXX] It drives like a drunk driver. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Using software version 2025.14.1 with FSD (Full Self Driving) version 12.6.4. About 50% of the time the vehicle attempts and fails to change lanes when using FSD. It will: 1. Turn on signal and not change lanes, confusing cars around me. Or more often 2. Swerve between lanes indefinitely. See example at [XXX] It drives like a drunk driver. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Software 2025.14.1, Full Self Driving 12.6.4 (FSD). Vehicle when using FSD continuously slows to 10 MPH below the speed limit. You can manually press the accelerator to speed up but FSD will not brake when doing so and warns you of the same. After a minute of being back at the speed limit, FSD again slows down. Repeat this process constantly. Very dangerous.

Software 2025.14.1, Full Self Driving 12.6.4 (FSD). Vehicle when using FSD continuously slows to 10 MPH below the speed limit. You can manually press the accelerator to speed up but FSD will not brake when doing so and warns you of the same. After a minute of being back at the speed limit, FSD again slows down. Repeat this process constantly. Very dangerous.

I am reporting a traumatic incident involving a 2017 Tesla Model S (loaner) that crashed on [XXX], in Arizona while Autopilot was engaged. We were traveling eastbound at 55 mph on [XXX] near [XXX] when the vehicle suddenly pulled hard left into the median and hit a tree. I briefly lost consciousness and suffered a concussion; my passenger sustained a broken back and thumb. Smoke rose from the car, and doors wouldn't open. I’m claustrophobic—it was terrifying. I managed to exit via the front passenger door but couldn't move my friend due to possible spinal injuries. This incident changed our lives. I have chronic back pain and PTSD. My friend hasn’t worked since. Tesla has not taken accountability. I was told internal footage exists and others have seen it, but I’ve never been given access. No third party (manufacturer, police, or insurer) has inspected the vehicle—only Tesla. I tried to buy the wreck at auction to preserve evidence but; my bid for a totaled tesla was $10k, it was declined. There were no warning lights or alerts before the crash. Autopilot failed. If the car had veered into traffic or pedestrians, people might’ve died. Instead of support, I was found at fault by AAA (despite no citation), received six points, and my premium rose to $2,200/month. Tesla must be held accountable. Consumers deserve transparency. Autopilot gave no warning and couldn’t avoid a tree in broad daylight. I urge the NHTSA to investigate this crash, request the vehicle’s data/video, and provide resources for victims of vehicle tech failures. I can supply witness contacts and medical documentation. Please help. Complacency is going cost lives. There should be a class action lawsuit. Blood on the hands of Tesla for using humans as test rats. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Stoped at intersection. While trying to engage signal lights, hit the stalk below that engages full self driving. Car immediately jumped into intersection .in front of another car and almost collided. Since the last update, Cars with my configuration wave been acting irradely and it is not safe to use FSD.

Stoped at intersection. While trying to engage signal lights, hit the stalk below that engages full self driving. Car immediately jumped into intersection .in front of another car and almost collided. Since the last update, Cars with my configuration wave been acting irradely and it is not safe to use FSD.

Car auto accelerated in parking lot structure. Hit column; air bags did not deploy so no injury to me, the driver. Dealer refuses to confirm the data to support their conclusion that driver was at fault. Vehicle inspected by dealer owned collision center and dealer related insurance company. No warning or messages prior to auto acceleration.

Car auto accelerated in parking lot structure. Hit column; air bags did not deploy so no injury to me, the driver. Dealer refuses to confirm the data to support their conclusion that driver was at fault. Vehicle inspected by dealer owned collision center and dealer related insurance company. No warning or messages prior to auto acceleration.

I used Summon on [XXX] to bring my car to me because it was parked way at the end of the parking lot at Discount tire. There was only 1 car in the whole lot, which was parked next to my Tesla. While using the “come to Me” feature in Summon – My Tesla pulled forward and then turned and drove right in to the car parked next to mine. It did quite a bit of damage to my Tesla and the Mercedes parked next to me it ran into. When I called my local Tesla Service Center in Austin to ask what I am supposed to do, they told me they needed to run diagnostics to see if they can fix the “summon” issue. After running diagnostics they blamed the issue on the wrap I have on my car. They did not test the sensors obviously though, because they work fine through the wrap. Not to mention that Tesla offers wraps from the factory now. They also stated that Summon was aborted due to collision, so it did report their was a wreck. Repair Notes: The proximity sensors on the vehicle are being obstructed by the vehicle wrap, which results in interference or compromised sensor functionality. This interference can disrupt the accurate detection of surrounding objects, impacting the vehicle’s ability to engage safety features like autopark. Data analysis reveals that the autopark function was aborted during collision, due to the seat belt not being fastened at the time of the incident. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

I used Summon on [XXX] to bring my car to me because it was parked way at the end of the parking lot at Discount tire. There was only 1 car in the whole lot, which was parked next to my Tesla. While using the “come to Me” feature in Summon – My Tesla pulled forward and then turned and drove right in to the car parked next to mine. It did quite a bit of damage to my Tesla and the Mercedes parked next to me it ran into. When I called my local Tesla Service Center in Austin to ask what I am supposed to do, they told me they needed to run diagnostics to see if they can fix the “summon” issue. After running diagnostics they blamed the issue on the wrap I have on my car. They did not test the sensors obviously though, because they work fine through the wrap. Not to mention that Tesla offers wraps from the factory now. They also stated that Summon was aborted due to collision, so it did report their was a wreck. Repair Notes: The proximity sensors on the vehicle are being obstructed by the vehicle wrap, which results in interference or compromised sensor functionality. This interference can disrupt the accurate detection of surrounding objects, impacting the vehicle’s ability to engage safety features like autopark. Data analysis reveals that the autopark function was aborted during collision, due to the seat belt not being fastened at the time of the incident. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

I used Summon on [XXX] to bring my car to me because it was parked way at the end of the parking lot at Discount tire. There was only 1 car in the whole lot, which was parked next to my Tesla. While using the “come to Me” feature in Summon – My Tesla pulled forward and then turned and drove right in to the car parked next to mine. It did quite a bit of damage to my Tesla and the Mercedes parked next to me it ran into. When I called my local Tesla Service Center in Austin to ask what I am supposed to do, they told me they needed to run diagnostics to see if they can fix the “summon” issue. After running diagnostics they blamed the issue on the wrap I have on my car. They did not test the sensors obviously though, because they work fine through the wrap. Not to mention that Tesla offers wraps from the factory now. They also stated that Summon was aborted due to collision, so it did report their was a wreck. Repair Notes: The proximity sensors on the vehicle are being obstructed by the vehicle wrap, which results in interference or compromised sensor functionality. This interference can disrupt the accurate detection of surrounding objects, impacting the vehicle’s ability to engage safety features like autopark. Data analysis reveals that the autopark function was aborted during collision, due to the seat belt not being fastened at the time of the incident. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

The contact owns a 2017 Tesla Model S. The contact stated that prior to the failure experienced, there was an abnormal clicking sound coming from the steering wheel. The contact attempted to start the vehicle, and upon starting the vehicle, the message "Service Power Steering" was displayed, and the EPS warning light was illuminated. The local dealer was contacted; however, the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was unknown.

The contact owns a 2017 Tesla Model S. The contact stated that prior to the failure experienced, there was an abnormal clicking sound coming from the steering wheel. The contact attempted to start the vehicle, and upon starting the vehicle, the message "Service Power Steering" was displayed, and the EPS warning light was illuminated. The local dealer was contacted; however, the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was unknown.

I activated Tesla's Smart Summon feature on the 2017 Tesla Model S to autonomously drive from the parking spot to the front entrance of the restaurant where I was waiting. Pulling out of the spot (my car was back in), the vehicle prematurely turned and contacted the front bumper of the adjacent vehicle (also backed in). My vehicle proceeded for a few feet causing severe damage to my driver side and the other vehicles bumper. I entered my vehicle and pulled away from other vehicle which is still in contact with. Take document with photos, I returned my vehicle to the location where it occurred (except not in contact). See photos. I contact that evening and they spent the next week investigating. They disavow and responsibility and said I was supposed to monitor the progress. The incident took a few second and there was not time to react to avoid damage.

Computer software failure. Intermittent problem that started with a recent software update. When backing out of a parking space, car will move a few feet then go into park and set the parking brake. Putting car back into reverse allows the car to move about 2 feet then the parking brake re engages. This has repeated more than 6 times in the process of backing out of a parking space. (There was at lease 3' of clearance to the sides of the vehicle and nothing behind the vehicle.) This is very dangerous when backing out of a diagonal parking space that is along the side of a busy road. I have scheduled Tesla service for the soonest appointment which is 2 weeks from now.

The contact owns a 2017 Tesla Model S. The contact received notifications of NHTSA Campaign Numbers: 23V838000 (Electrical System) and 24V051000 (Electrical System); however, the parts to do the recall repairs were unavailable. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repairs. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure. Parts distribution disconnect.

While using the summon feature from my iPhone with the Tesla application my car drove into my house causing damage. I have video of this from my camera doorbell of the incident. I work in mobile application development and was told this was user error by Tesla when it first occurred.

While using the summon feature from my iPhone with the Tesla application my car drove into my house causing damage. I have video of this from my camera doorbell of the incident. I work in mobile application development and was told this was user error by Tesla when it first occurred.