Owners have filed 140 complaints
about the 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning BEV with NHTSA between 2022 and 2026.
The largest single group is the electrical system.
Across this model's run it ranks 2 of 4 worst.
The letter says how bad. This says what kind — whether this year drew
an unusual number of complaints, unusually dangerous
ones, or failures that arrived unusually early.
The dashed ring is 50 — the national norm. Further out is worse.
Complaint volume — 71
Against the median year of the Ford F-150 Lightning BEV. 50 means typical for this
model; 100 means roughly double.
Severity — 41
7.9% of these complaints
involved a crash, fire, injury or death, against a national rate of
9.7%.
Early failure — 100
91% of failures with a mileage on record happened under
36,000 miles, against a national rate of
29%.
How 2022 compares with every other Ford F-150 Lightning BEV
NHTSA files every complaint against a named sub-assembly, not just a
system. This is the difference between knowing it was "the engine" and
knowing which part of it — the list to hand a mechanic.
Adaptive Cruise Control
623.1%
Automatic Emergency Braking
519.2%
Warnings
519.2%
Tv/Radio/Speakers
311.5%
Accelerator Pedal
27.7%
Body
27.7%
Sun/Moon Roof Assembly
27.7%
Port
13.8%
When it fails
Odometer readings owners gave when they filed. About half of all
complaints include one.
1,000 – 9,999 miles
327.3%
10,000 – 24,999 miles
545.5%
25,000 – 49,999 miles
327.3%
When owners complained
A spike years after the car went on sale usually means a part wearing
out on schedule across the whole fleet — the kind of pattern no single
owner can see from inside their own car.
Sep 2022peak 11Aug 2026
Complaints that involved harm
Reports where the owner recorded a crash, a fire, an injury or a death.
at 25,000 milesWinter Haven, FLCrash
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:ADAS:AUTONOMOUS/SELF DRIVING
The contact owns a 2022 Ford F-150. The contact stated that while driving at 20–25 MPH with the BlueCruise hands-free driving mode activated, the steering wheel inadvertently veered to the right, and the vehicle violently jerked across three lanes of traffic before slamming into the guardrail. No warning light was illuminated. The air bags did not deploy. There were no injuries sustained, and medical attention was not received. A police report was filed. The contact received a citation for reckless driving. The vehicle was towed to the dealer but had not yet been repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and advised the contact to file a complaint with the NHTSA Hotline. The failure mileage was approximately 25,000.
NHTSA complaint #11596168 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 23,000 milesLivonia, MICrash
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL
The contact owns a 2022 Ford F-150. The contact stated that while the contact's wife was driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle independently accelerated. The contact stated that the vehicle was in line at the car wash when the failure occurred. The vehicle re-ended the vehicle in front, which caused several vehicles to crash into one another. In addition, the vehicle bounced off the curve and crashed into two other parked vehicles before landing on the side of one of the vehicles. The contact stated that the whole incident happened in about five seconds. The contact stated that a parked police vehicle was one of the vehicles involved in the crash. No injuries were sustained. A Police report was filed. The vehicle was towed to the tow yard. The vehicle was scheduled to be towed to the dealer. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 23,000.
NHTSA complaint #11584450 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Lincoln, CACrash
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: WARNINGS
My 2022 F150 Lightning was involved in a 3 car collision on Interstate 80. Three safety components of the pickup truck did not engage in preventing the accident. Specifically the adaptive cruising did not slow the truck down as traffic came to a slow crawl on the highway due to an apparent accident up ahead. Normally the adaptive cruising will start decreasing speed if the vehicle in front encroaches on the distance set for clearance. The second component which was the forward collision aural and visual warnings did not sound nor flash a warning sign on the dashboard that a collision was imminent. And the final component that failed to engage was the emergency collision braking. My seatbelts did not automatically pull back anticipating a collision. No emergency braking was applied by the truck. My wife who was the driver and I was the front right seat passenger. She was able to apply the brakes to slow down but not enough to stop before we impacted the vehicle in front which then got pushed into the 3rd vehicle in front of him. Our impact speed was probably less than 10=20 mph but the impact totaled the middle vehicle. Forthunately no injuries in any of the 3 vehicles. The middle vehicle airbags deployed. Our airbags did not deploy. California CHP came and told us no report needed to be filed. Claim was made with our insurance companies. My Ford service department representative was able to access the telemetry data on the truck and noted the time of the collision registered on the onboard computer but there were no indications that any of the 3 safety systems engaged as I mentioned. The windshield of the truck had been replaced by Safelite Windows less than a month before the accident which may have resulted in perhaps not able to sense the upcoming collision although they did the realignment after replacing the windshield. This may have been a secondary cause of the collision.
NHTSA complaint #11551285 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Lincoln, CACrash
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL
My 2022 F150 Lightning was involved in a 3 car collision on Interstate 80. Three safety components of the pickup truck did not engage in preventing the accident. Specifically the adaptive cruising did not slow the truck down as traffic came to a slow crawl on the highway due to an apparent accident up ahead. Normally the adaptive cruising will start decreasing speed if the vehicle in front encroaches on the distance set for clearance. The second component which was the forward collision aural and visual warnings did not sound nor flash a warning sign on the dashboard that a collision was imminent. And the final component that failed to engage was the emergency collision braking. My seatbelts did not automatically pull back anticipating a collision. No emergency braking was applied by the truck. My wife who was the driver and I was the front right seat passenger. She was able to apply the brakes to slow down but not enough to stop before we impacted the vehicle in front which then got pushed into the 3rd vehicle in front of him. Our impact speed was probably less than 10=20 mph but the impact totaled the middle vehicle. Forthunately no injuries in any of the 3 vehicles. The middle vehicle airbags deployed. Our airbags did not deploy. California CHP came and told us no report needed to be filed. Claim was made with our insurance companies. My Ford service department representative was able to access the telemetry data on the truck and noted the time of the collision registered on the onboard computer but there were no indications that any of the 3 safety systems engaged as I mentioned. The windshield of the truck had been replaced by Safelite Windows less than a month before the accident which may have resulted in perhaps not able to sense the upcoming collision although they did the realignment after replacing the windshield. This may have been a secondary cause of the collision.
NHTSA complaint #11551285 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
My 2022 F150 Lightning was involved in a 3 car collision on Interstate 80. Three safety components of the pickup truck did not engage in preventing the accident. Specifically the adaptive cruising did not slow the truck down as traffic came to a slow crawl on the highway due to an apparent accident up ahead. Normally the adaptive cruising will start decreasing speed if the vehicle in front encroaches on the distance set for clearance. The second component which was the forward collision aural and visual warnings did not sound nor flash a warning sign on the dashboard that a collision was imminent. And the final component that failed to engage was the emergency collision braking. My seatbelts did not automatically pull back anticipating a collision. No emergency braking was applied by the truck. My wife who was the driver and I was the front right seat passenger. She was able to apply the brakes to slow down but not enough to stop before we impacted the vehicle in front which then got pushed into the 3rd vehicle in front of him. Our impact speed was probably less than 10=20 mph but the impact totaled the middle vehicle. Forthunately no injuries in any of the 3 vehicles. The middle vehicle airbags deployed. Our airbags did not deploy. California CHP came and told us no report needed to be filed. Claim was made with our insurance companies. My Ford service department representative was able to access the telemetry data on the truck and noted the time of the collision registered on the onboard computer but there were no indications that any of the 3 safety systems engaged as I mentioned. The windshield of the truck had been replaced by Safelite Windows less than a month before the accident which may have resulted in perhaps not able to sense the upcoming collision although they did the realignment after replacing the windshield. This may have been a secondary cause of the collision.
NHTSA complaint #11551285 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Laguna Niguel, CACrash
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL
On May 25, 2023 I was stopped at a red light with one car in front of me. My foot was not on brake because i use the one peddle feature. All of the sudden, my car accelerated and ran into the car in front of me. In the 2 seconds before hitting car, I saw my collision assistant light go on but there was no braking at all. I've been driving for almost 40 years and nothing like this has ever happened. Clearly, something internally with the sensors or computer system malfunctioned. Fortunately, nobody was injured but I can't imagine if a pedestrian was in front of me. Also, the collision braking malfunctioned and brakes didn't go on either. I have not had anything problems with the truck in the 6 months I've been driving vehicle. The only error message I've been seeing before this accident is something about an Air Damn malfunction. I recently brought it into dealership and they said they fixed it but it was still coming on after leaving the dealership. Not sure exactly what this Air Damn is and if it could be related. I immediately called Ford about this and they said to contact NHTSA. I also quickly went to dealership where I purchased vehicle but they didn't seem to know what to do. My understanding, according to Ford, is to start the process with NHTSA. Let me know if you have any additional questions and what the next step is. I'm very concerned to drive vehicle when it comes back from getting all the damage fixed.
NHTSA complaint #11524748 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
The most recent complaints
In the owners' own words, exactly as filed with NHTSA.
San Jose, CA
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Main cluster display not working. Remainder of displays, accessories and truck works as normal
NHTSA complaint #11758486 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Wappingers Falls, NY
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Back up camera not working
NHTSA complaint #11758119 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Wading River, NY
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The forward dash instrument panel is completely out. Unable to see miles per hour, charge settings, odometer, cruise control etc. Completely blank.
NHTSA complaint #11751680 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Ridgefield, CT
STEERING
Component Failed & Inspection Status: The front-left upper and lower control arms, ball joints, wheel hub assembly, steering knuckle, and front axle shaft have failed. Severe environmental corrosion has completely seized and fused the steering knuckle inside the wheel hub. All original failed components are currently intact and are fully available for physical inspection upon request. Safety Risk: This severe structural corrosion causes the steering knuckle and axle to seize, creating an imminent risk of primary steering component separation while driving. A steering separation on a heavy electric vehicle (over 6,000 lbs curb weight) causes a sudden, complete loss of directional control, creating an immediate life-threatening hazard to the occupants and surrounding traffic. Confirmation & Testing:The failure and severe structural corrosion were officially diagnosed and confirmed by a certified technician at an authorized Ford dealership service center. Warning Signs & Symptoms: The symptom appeared as a very noisy, distinct creaking sound coming from the front-left suspension. This noise occurred specifically when turning the steering wheel and when operating the vehicle at speeds below 40 mph. The sounds may have been present but obscured by road noise at higher speeds. There were no dashboard warning lamps or error messages prior to the diagnostic inspection. Systemic Concerns: This 2022 model is experiencing a severe vulnerability to premature environmental corrosion that causes the steering knuckle, axle, and control arms to seize to the point of failure. This demonstrates a critical structural durability issue under heavy EV loads in road-salt regions that warrants federal safety tracking for the 2022 model year.
NHTSA complaint #11741745 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Ridgefield, CT
SUSPENSION
Component Failed & Inspection Status: The front-left upper and lower control arms, ball joints, wheel hub assembly, steering knuckle, and front axle shaft have failed. Severe environmental corrosion has completely seized and fused the steering knuckle inside the wheel hub. All original failed components are currently intact and are fully available for physical inspection upon request. Safety Risk: This severe structural corrosion causes the steering knuckle and axle to seize, creating an imminent risk of primary steering component separation while driving. A steering separation on a heavy electric vehicle (over 6,000 lbs curb weight) causes a sudden, complete loss of directional control, creating an immediate life-threatening hazard to the occupants and surrounding traffic. Confirmation & Testing:The failure and severe structural corrosion were officially diagnosed and confirmed by a certified technician at an authorized Ford dealership service center. Warning Signs & Symptoms: The symptom appeared as a very noisy, distinct creaking sound coming from the front-left suspension. This noise occurred specifically when turning the steering wheel and when operating the vehicle at speeds below 40 mph. The sounds may have been present but obscured by road noise at higher speeds. There were no dashboard warning lamps or error messages prior to the diagnostic inspection. Systemic Concerns: This 2022 model is experiencing a severe vulnerability to premature environmental corrosion that causes the steering knuckle, axle, and control arms to seize to the point of failure. This demonstrates a critical structural durability issue under heavy EV loads in road-salt regions that warrants federal safety tracking for the 2022 model year.
NHTSA complaint #11741745 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Irving, NY
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
Vehicle: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning Pro VIN: [XXX] This vehicle is subject to a fire-related battery recall issued by Ford Motor Company. The vehicle has been at an authorized Ford dealership (West Herr, New York) since December 26 for recall repair. As of today, it has been out of service for 53 days. The dealership has stated that the delay is due to EV battery lift capacity limitations and that my vehicle is waiting behind another truck because they only have one lift capable of performing the repair. No firm repair completion date has been provided. For over seven weeks, I have received no proactive communication from the dealership regarding repair status. All updates have required me to initiate contact. This complaint is being filed to document prolonged failure to complete a fire-related safety recall due to dealership capacity constraints. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint #11718477 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Belgrade, MT
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
The rear lightbar assembly on our 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning Lariat has developed micro-cracks in the outer lens, allowing moisture to accumulate inside. This has caused flickering or inoperative reverse lamps and now appears to be impacting the rear passenger blinker, which functions intermittently. We are concerned that the moisture has begun to corrode the rear wiring harness or electrical system, creating additional safety risks. When we reported the issue, a Kendall Ford representative told us the rear lightbar replacement was “mainly cosmetic,” but that assessment contradicts both Ford’s recall documentation and our experience. Moisture intrusion has already led to intermittent lighting failures that reduce signaling visibility to other drivers, posing a real risk of collision. The problem has been confirmed by the dealer and a Ford Field Service Engineer dispatched from Dearborn, who inspected the truck in 2025 after the same recall repair (23S30) failed. Ford has since issued a new recall (25V731 / 25S86) acknowledging improper dealer repairs as the cause. Visible condensation, flickering lights, and intermittent “charging system fault” and “sensor unavailable” messages began shortly after the 2023 recall repair and have continued to worsen. The vehicle remains in our possession and is available for inspection by NHTSA or Ford corporate upon request.
NHTSA complaint #11697730 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Belgrade, MT
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The rear lightbar assembly on our 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning Lariat has developed micro-cracks in the outer lens, allowing moisture to accumulate inside. This has caused flickering or inoperative reverse lamps and now appears to be impacting the rear passenger blinker, which functions intermittently. We are concerned that the moisture has begun to corrode the rear wiring harness or electrical system, creating additional safety risks. When we reported the issue, a Kendall Ford representative told us the rear lightbar replacement was “mainly cosmetic,” but that assessment contradicts both Ford’s recall documentation and our experience. Moisture intrusion has already led to intermittent lighting failures that reduce signaling visibility to other drivers, posing a real risk of collision. The problem has been confirmed by the dealer and a Ford Field Service Engineer dispatched from Dearborn, who inspected the truck in 2025 after the same recall repair (23S30) failed. Ford has since issued a new recall (25V731 / 25S86) acknowledging improper dealer repairs as the cause. Visible condensation, flickering lights, and intermittent “charging system fault” and “sensor unavailable” messages began shortly after the 2023 recall repair and have continued to worsen. The vehicle remains in our possession and is available for inspection by NHTSA or Ford corporate upon request.
NHTSA complaint #11697730 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Sterling, CO
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
The light bar on the tailgate that is the brake lights and reverse lights is known to get moisture inside and stop working. It is a known problem with Ford as they recalled them 2 years ago and replaced it under warranty. However the replacement part suffers from the same issue. So, my replacement light bar has stopped working, and even though I have Fords Premium Care extended warranty that includes all LED lighting, they will not cover the repair. This part is a safety item (brake lights and reverse lights) that is known to fail, it should be a safety recall item covered out of warranty anyway, and SURELY covered with an extended warranty (Ford Premium Care with Lighting added) but it apparently is not .... It seems that this safety issue should be covered and replaced Thanks
NHTSA complaint #11694636 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Chaska, MN
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
I own a 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning Lariat (VIN [XXX] ). Around June 6, 2025, I brought my truck to Apple Ford Shakopee for a scheduled appointment because I noticed moisture collecting inside the rear light bar. The service representative told me Ford considers that moisture normal, likely from a car wash, and that it would dry out on its own. At that time the truck had fewer than 36,000 miles and was still under the bumper-to-bumper warranty. The moisture never went away, and the light bar is now failing — my backup lights are dimming and flickering. I’ve since learned there was a recall (23S30) on 2022–2023 F-150 Lightning Lariat and Platinum trucks for micro-cracks in the rear light-bar lens that allow moisture in. My VIN currently shows no open recalls, but this failure appears identical to what the recall described. Additionally, owner forums are full of reports from other Lightning owners experiencing the same issue — including those who already had the recall repair completed, whose replacement light bars are now showing moisture again. This suggests the defect may persist even after recall repairs. I’m reporting this because the issue compromises the rear lighting and visibility of the vehicle. I hope Ford and NHTSA will review whether the recall scope or remedy should be expanded to include affected vehicles like mine and ensure owners aren’t left with expensive out-of-pocket repairs for a known manufacturing defect. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint #11694640 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 38,000 milesWausau, WI
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
The contact owns a 2022 Ford F-150. The contact stated that while reversing, the reverse lights failed to function as intended. The contact exited the vehicle, and someone pointed out that the rear passenger’s side reverse light failed to activate as designed. The contact stated that the rear light bar had failed to function as intended. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The contact stated that the vehicle was serviced under NHTSA Campaign Number: 23V418000 (EXTERIOR LIGHTING) two years ago. The contact stated that the failure persisted. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 38,000.
NHTSA complaint #11693958 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Yukon, OK
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
Rear light bar was replaced under Recall 23S30 on April 30, 2024. At the time, light bar had moisture inside and was no longer functioning. Now same issue has presented itself with the new part. Rear lightbar works sporadically or not at all. This means that the red part of the light bar flashes randomly while driving, probably confusing other drivers. This also means the reverse lights do not work. So there is no indication when the vehicle is reversing. I noticed the moisture around the beginning of August 2025 and then noticed flickering lights while in reverse around August 18, 2025. Now, there are no reverse lights at all.
NHTSA complaint #11685962 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Yukon, OK
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Rear light bar was replaced under Recall 23S30 on April 30, 2024. At the time, light bar had moisture inside and was no longer functioning. Now same issue has presented itself with the new part. Rear lightbar works sporadically or not at all. This means that the red part of the light bar flashes randomly while driving, probably confusing other drivers. This also means the reverse lights do not work. So there is no indication when the vehicle is reversing. I noticed the moisture around the beginning of August 2025 and then noticed flickering lights while in reverse around August 18, 2025. Now, there are no reverse lights at all.
NHTSA complaint #11685962 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Lenexa, KS
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
Water formed from condensation caused the Lariat Light bar to no longer function
NHTSA complaint #11683967 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Fort Mill, SC
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
I bought my truck less than a year ago. I found out that the recall (23530) repair on my truck had been completed about 2 months prior to me buying it from another dealership. I took it to a local dealership last week (July 3rd) for the diagnostic and the findings were obvious. Water/moisture in the light that shorted out the right side lights and causes the camera to flicker like a strobe light. I paid $200 for the diagnostic fee only for them to repeatedly mention how the truck is out of warranty and the recall part warranty was expired as well. This isn’t a warranty/recall issue. This is a faulty parts issue that appears to be rampant amongst several lighting owners. There’s no record of the replacement part’s manufacturing date, but my tailgate light bar is having the same moisture issues as the original reasons for the recall. When this gets repaired, it will be the 3rd part on this truck in as many years as its existence. Ford corporate has repeatedly dismissed this as “out of warranty” even though the issue is with the same recalled part itself. I’ve called the ford customer service line for them to lean on the warranty expiration and the recall date. Sorry for the long windedness but I just need the steps to get this fixed. It’s beyond frustrating having to deal with this. Any help would be appreciated. If you need any info just let me know. thanks in advance [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint #11673686 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 1,000 milesSpring Grove, IL
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
The contact owns a 2022 Ford F-150. The contact stated while the vehicle was parked, the rear light bar failed to function as intended. The contact stated the lights were inoperable and there was water inside the rear light bar. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or the dealer. The dealer was made aware of the failure. The contact stated the rear light bar was replaced under recall. In addition, the contact stated that the rear light bar had failed three times since 2022. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and a case was filed. The contact was informed that the repair was not covered under warranty. The contact was advised to contact the NHTSA Hotline to report the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 1,000.
NHTSA complaint #11670591 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Middletown, DE
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
My trucks rear light bar was repaired under the NHTSA recall 23S30. This was done in 2023 but Ford's repair did not fix the issue and the light bar continues to allow moisture in and thus the light does not work. I currently have the truck being diagnosed by Hertrich Ford of Elkton in Elkton Maryland and a case number with Ford regarding the issue. The caes number is [XXX]. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint #11667695 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Middletown, DE
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
My trucks rear light bar was repaired under the NHTSA recall 23S30. This was done in 2023 but Ford's repair did not fix the issue and the light bar continues to allow moisture in and thus the light does not work. I currently have the truck being diagnosed by Hertrich Ford of Elkton in Elkton Maryland and a case number with Ford regarding the issue. The caes number is [XXX]. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint #11667695 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Simi Valley, CA
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
This is a problem from an old recall. The rear tail gate light was recalled and replace because it was leaking in Jan 2024. The exact same problem has happened again in March 2025. Ford refuses to replace the defective part. After research in forums online I have noticed many other people having the same issue. This is a safety issue as it is part of the exterior lighitng system. It is either completely off or will be flashing making it difficult for other drivers to see me. Another safety issue, it made the backup camera inoperable I did have to have the light replace at considerable cost so it is no longer available. I did ask the dealer to save the light for me and they did not. There was no warning messages on the vehicle computer system
NHTSA complaint #11663216 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Natrona Heights, PA
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
The rear light bar and reversing lamp assembly, which was part of a safety recall, is filled with water and the lights are malfunctioning again. Ford is telling me that the replacement part has a 1 year warranty so that I would have to pay over $1600 for a replacement. This is a widespread issue with many of these trucks. Ford admitted that it was a manufacturing defect with the original part. However, the replacement part has the same issue so it is my belief that Ford has not fulfilled their duty to adequately repair an obvious safety issue and should be held responsible for the replacement of this part at no cost to the vehicle owner.
NHTSA complaint #11659840 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Natrona Heights, PA
STRUCTURE:BODY
The rear light bar and reversing lamp assembly, which was part of a safety recall, is filled with water and the lights are malfunctioning again. Ford is telling me that the replacement part has a 1 year warranty so that I would have to pay over $1600 for a replacement. This is a widespread issue with many of these trucks. Ford admitted that it was a manufacturing defect with the original part. However, the replacement part has the same issue so it is my belief that Ford has not fulfilled their duty to adequately repair an obvious safety issue and should be held responsible for the replacement of this part at no cost to the vehicle owner.
NHTSA complaint #11659840 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Thousand Oaks, CA
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
Rear tail light/bar was recalled a couple of years ago for small micro cracks that water got in. My truck tail light had water in it and was replaced under recall. Less than 2 years later it has happened again. Ford denied covering it under warranty per the dealer who replaced it originally. . Others have posted that their tail light has failed and the leds stay on. Mine as far as I know, has not failed yet. No warning lamps. I feel ford should replace it again since they have had it recalled previously.
NHTSA complaint #11655386 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Stevenson Ranch, CA
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
This letter serves as formal notification of a persistent and unresolvable defect in my 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning. The defect concerns the tailgate light, which continues to leak water despite multiple repair attempts. I purchased/leased this vehicle on [XXX] from Galpin Ford on 15505 Roscoe Blvd, North Hills, CA 91343. The vehicle is currently under the original manufacturer's warranty. The tailgate light has exhibited a recurring issue of water intrusion, leading to condensation, malfunction, potential for electrical damage. This problem significantly impairs the vehicle's safety due to Inoperative reverse lamps. This may reduce the awareness of other motorists or road users of the driver’s intention to operate the vehicle in reverse gear, increasing the risk of injury or crash. It has also in the past caused electrical shorting that caused other lamps to fail, potentially resulting in the risk of injury or crash due to failed communication with other drivers. The following repair attempts have been made to address this defect, once under the recall: 1. March 14, 2023: Autonation Ford performed the repair for the first time. 2. March 18, 2024: Autonation Ford performed the repair for the second time. 3. March 24, 2025: Autonation Ford performed the repair for the third time. Despite these attempts, the defect persists. I have also become aware that numerous other Ford F-150 Lightning owners across the country are experiencing the same or a similar tailgate light issue. This is evidenced by discussions on the Ford Lightning Owners Forum, reports on social media platforms such as Facebook. This widespread problem indicates a potential design or manufacturing defect that Ford has failed to adequately address. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint #11655534 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Neenah, WI
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
Under recall 23S30 in 2023 my rear light bar assembly which included brake light, back up camera, and white reverse lights for illumination the area behind the vehicle when backing up. There was a new rear lightbar part issued as part of that recall. After almost 2 years the same issue has occurred again to my vehicle. I'm concerned the new part # has not resolved this original issue and a new recall needs to be put in place.
NHTSA complaint #11655178 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Escondido, CA
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
My truck was "repaired" for recall 23S30. The light bar gets microcracks that leet water in and short out the lights. The "repair" was to replace the light bar with another light bar that does the exact same thing. It lasted just over a year before it went out. It didn't even last as long as the original that was recalled and replaced
NHTSA complaint #11655072 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.