2,159,197 complaints · US federal record · updated daily
Find out what breaks before you buy the car
Every complaint American drivers have filed with the federal government
since 1995 — sorted by model year, graded, and turned into the one answer
a used-car buyer wants: which years of this car should I avoid?
When complaints were filed with NHTSA — not when the cars were built.
The most complained-about models
These are raw complaint totals across a model's whole run. Big sellers
collect more complaints simply by being everywhere, which is exactly why
the grade never compares one model with another.
While driving at highway speeds, a severe transmission defect caused an electronic and mechanical failure chain on my 745-mile vehicle. The transmission experienced an immediate loss of hydraulic control, causing the engine to surge to 4,000 RPM and violently slam three separate times under load, attempting to force a gear engagement (DTC P076F-00). This severe physical trauma caused the Transmission Control Module (TCM) to completely drop communication with the Engine Control Unit (ECU), throwing error codes U0080-00 (Ethernet Bus 1) and C2226-00 (TCM Disabled ECU).The vehicle's safety software responded to this network crash by entirely cutting transmission line pressure. This architecture resulted in an instantaneous and catastrophic Loss of Motive Power (LMP). The vehicle entered a dead-freewheel state, causing it to roll backward on an active, inclined freeway off-ramp into oncoming traffic. A severe collision was avoided solely due to immediate driver reaction time. The driver and a [XXX] passenger were left stranded in a live traffic zone. Dealership Repair Order #XXX explicitly documents this loss of motive power and unintended directional movement. However, the manufacturer's current remediation plan completely ignores the severe electrical and structural trauma. The dealership is attempting a superficial valve body replacement based on a stationary shop air test. This low-pressure test cannot inspect for warped clutch steel plates, glazed friction linings, micro-fractured planetary gear teeth, or torque converter clutch fatigue caused by consecutive 4,000 RPM shock-loads. Furthermore, a mechanical valve body fails to address the high-speed Ethernet bus crash that disabled the TCM. This vehicle suffers from an unpredictable, systemic electronic and mechanical safety defect that creates an immediate hazard to public safety. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint #11764262 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
(1)The original 12-V battery was replaced by the dealership on XXX (after 5-week and 120-mile usage) with a new one, model: 00544-MFH50, S/N [XXX], 540CCA and 100 RC. (2)Upon double-checking with the 2026 Lexus Owner’s Manual for RX450H+, on Page 605, it clearly stated that when replacing the battery, its case size should be the same as the previous one (LN3) ……. with a performance rating of CCA of 603A or higher. (3)The dealership indicated the 00544-MFH50 was the right battery based on the VIN number per Lexus internal database. The database also showed another battery model: 28800-31572. (4)However, according to the battery information at [XXX], both 00544-MFH50 and 28800-31572 are listed as “Does not fit” the 2026 RX450H+ vehicle. (5)The other battery, model 00544-21171LXPR, is listed as the HV 12-V battery for the 2026 RX450H+ at [XXX]. (6)Also on the Lexus parts website, this 2026 RX450H+ VIN number is recognized as RX350h (Base Trim), a totally different vehicle. It may be possible that the Lexus 2026 RX450H+ Owner’s Manual (published in [XXX], 2026, for the North American market) and [XXX] have been updated with the correct 12-V battery information, while the internal Lexus database was not. It was not clear whether factories in [XXX] or elsewhere, and [XXX] dealerships, still use the possibly outdated and conflicting information for initial battery installation and replacement when needed. The discrepancies between Lexus internal information (manufacturing and dealership) and publicly available information from the owner’s manual and official Lexus website caused significant confusion about which battery is the right one designed for this vehicle in 2026. Details please see attachment. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint #11764261 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Kumho 295/30 ZR20 date code 2919 Inner sidewall of passenger rear failed by separating and bulging over approximately 35% of the tire circumference. Occurred during a highway passing maneuver at 70mph and resulted in extreme vibration transmitted through vehicle and steering wheel. Resulted in difficulty controlling vehicle. Vehicle was brought to a stop on roadside shoulder and limped home at 45mph max speed.
NHTSA complaint #11764260 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
On September 11, 2026 at 5:11:51 PM in San Jose, CA, FSD (Supervised) had been engaged continuously for 23 minutes. The vehicle was traveling straight in its lane at 32 mph and still accelerating. FSD disengaged with no takeover warning: no visual alert, no chime. My data export from the manufacturer (200 ms resolution) confirms the timestamp and shows the driver-monitoring channel never entered either of its warning states during the drive, though both appear elsewhere in my data. Nothing I did caused it. Steering torque stayed within sensor noise, with no rightward torque at any point. First brake application was 5.56 seconds after; first accelerator input 15.5 seconds after; no steering wheel button events near the event. Immediately afterward the steering angle moved about 7 degrees right over five seconds with my torque still near zero. The vehicle left its lane toward parked cars and came very close to striking them. No forward collision warning, no automatic emergency braking. I braked manually and stopped. I re-engaged FSD 36 seconds later and again two minutes later. Both times it steered right again and I disengaged. No warning lamps or messages appeared before any of this. The manufacturer reviewed logs remotely but has not inspected the vehicle or reproduced the problem. They attribute it to reduced forward camera visibility. My export shows one camera-related alert for that drive, logged 23 minutes earlier and absent from the incident window. They later stated the vehicle logged 30 non-customer-facing "low" obstruction events over two weeks, and that a customer alert appears only for significant obstruction. I drove extensively in that period without incident. A condition judged not worth notifying me about should not also explain withdrawal of steering control at 32 mph. Root cause is unconfirmed pending a paid diagnosis I have not authorized. Vehicle available for inspection. I have dashcam footage and the full export.
NHTSA complaint #11764259 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
On September 11, 2026 at 5:11:51 PM in San Jose, CA, FSD (Supervised) had been engaged continuously for 23 minutes. The vehicle was traveling straight in its lane at 32 mph and still accelerating. FSD disengaged with no takeover warning: no visual alert, no chime. My data export from the manufacturer (200 ms resolution) confirms the timestamp and shows the driver-monitoring channel never entered either of its warning states during the drive, though both appear elsewhere in my data. Nothing I did caused it. Steering torque stayed within sensor noise, with no rightward torque at any point. First brake application was 5.56 seconds after; first accelerator input 15.5 seconds after; no steering wheel button events near the event. Immediately afterward the steering angle moved about 7 degrees right over five seconds with my torque still near zero. The vehicle left its lane toward parked cars and came very close to striking them. No forward collision warning, no automatic emergency braking. I braked manually and stopped. I re-engaged FSD 36 seconds later and again two minutes later. Both times it steered right again and I disengaged. No warning lamps or messages appeared before any of this. The manufacturer reviewed logs remotely but has not inspected the vehicle or reproduced the problem. They attribute it to reduced forward camera visibility. My export shows one camera-related alert for that drive, logged 23 minutes earlier and absent from the incident window. They later stated the vehicle logged 30 non-customer-facing "low" obstruction events over two weeks, and that a customer alert appears only for significant obstruction. I drove extensively in that period without incident. A condition judged not worth notifying me about should not also explain withdrawal of steering control at 32 mph. Root cause is unconfirmed pending a paid diagnosis I have not authorized. Vehicle available for inspection. I have dashcam footage and the full export.
NHTSA complaint #11764259 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
The hydraulic leveling system, a Lippert system failed. The hydraulic line on the driver's front leveling jack ruptured, causing hydraulic fluid to spray on the hot engine and exhaust. The engine was immediately turned off preventing a fire. The other danger is that this hydraulic line was holding the jack UP, and could have caused the jacks to drop to the pavement but fortunately we were not moving. The hydraulic line is thermoplastic and not made for high temp locations.
NHTSA complaint #11764258 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Where these numbers come from
When something goes wrong with a car in the United States, the owner can
file a complaint with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
NHTSA publishes every one of them. That file is
2,159,197 complaints long and grows every day.
FaultScore reads that file and does the arithmetic nobody wants to do by
hand: which model year of a car drew more complaints than the rest of its
run, which part they were about, how often the failure hurt somebody, and
at what mileage it tended to happen.
What it deliberately does not do is rank one car against another on
complaint counts. NHTSA does not publish sales figures, and without them a
best-seller looks worse than a rare car purely for being common. The grade
on every page compares a model year against
the other years of that same model — nothing else.
The full method is here.