Owners have filed 31 complaints
about the 2026 Tesla Model 3 with NHTSA between 2026 and 2026.
The largest single group is the driver assist & collision avoidance.
Across this model's run it ranks 9 of 10 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 — 2
Against the median year of the Tesla Model 3. 50 means typical for this
model; 100 means roughly double.
Severity — 100
64.5% of these complaints
involved a crash, fire, injury or death, against a national rate of
9.7%.
Early failure — not reported
Too few complaints recorded a mileage to measure this.
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.
Jan 2026peak 12Aug 2026
NHTSA investigations into the 2026 Tesla Model 3
An investigation is the step before a recall: the agency has seen enough
complaints to look into a pattern itself. An open one means it thinks
something may be wrong and nothing has been fixed yet.
3
investigations are
still open.
EA26002Opened 18 Mar 2026Still openELECTRICAL SYSTEM:ADAS
FSD Collisions in Reduced Roadway Visibility Conditions
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) is opening this Engineering Analysis to evaluate Tesla’s Full Self Driving Beta and Full Self Driving (Supervised) (collectively, FSD) degradation detection system. The focus of this investigation will be to assess the system’s ability, when encountering reduced roadway visibility conditions, to detect degradation and alert the driver with sufficient time to respond. ODI will evaluate the performance of FSD in degraded roadway conditions and the updates or modifications by Tesla to the degradation detection system, including the timing, purpose, and ca...
PE25012Opened 7 Oct 2025Still openELECTRICAL SYSTEM:ADAS
Traffic safety violations while Full Self Driving ("FSD") is engaged
The Office of Defects Investigation (“ODI”) is opening this Preliminary Evaluation (PE) to assess the scope, frequency, and potential safety consequences of FSD executing driving maneuvers that constitute traffic safety violations. This investigation concerns versions of FSD that Tesla has labeled as "FSD (Supervised)" and "FSD (Beta)." Tesla characterizes FSD as an SAE Level 2 partial automation system requiring a fully attentive driver who is engaged in the driving task at all times. Level 2 partial automation systems are designed to support and assist the driver in performing certain aspects...
AQ25002Opened 20 Aug 2025Still openELECTRICAL SYSTEM:ADAS
Compliance with Standing General Order 2021-01 Reporting Requirements
The Office of Defects Investigation (“ODI”) has identified numerous incident reports submitted by Tesla, Inc. (“Tesla”) in response to Standing General Order 2021-01 (the “SGO”), in which the reported crashes occurred several months or more before the dates of the reports. The majority of these reports involved crashes in which the Standing General Order in place at the time required a report to be submitted within one or five days of Tesla receiving notice of the crash. When the reports were submitted, Tesla submitted them in one of two ways. Many of the reports were submitted as part of a si...
Recalls on the 2026 Tesla Model 3
A complaint is one owner's allegation. A recall is the point at which
the manufacturer or a regulator agreed the defect is real and dangerous
enough to fix for free — however old the car is.
United States — NHTSA
25V410000
SEATS:CRITICAL FASTENERS
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2026 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles. The fasteners attaching the seat back to the seat bottom may have been improperly tightened.
Risk: The seat may not properly restrain the occupant, increasing the risk of injury during a crash.
Reports where the owner recorded a crash, a fire, an injury or a death.
South Salem, NYCrash
STEERING
Firstly, we were driving in the center lane on I-84W (three lanes), with Full Self Driving (FSD) at 55 mph. The car veered left on it owns (under FSD) into the center median with the front driver side of the vehicle struck the metal beam guardrail causing both air bags to deploy on the driver and left rear passenger sides. The car continued to move forward in the next 4-6 seconds under FSD (approximately 10-20 feet range) and then came to a complete stop with flashing warning screen asking driver to take over the steering wheel immediately.
NHTSA complaint #11751300 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
South Salem, NYCrash
LANE DEPARTURE: ASSIST
Firstly, we were driving in the center lane on I-84W (three lanes), with Full Self Driving (FSD) at 55 mph. The car veered left on it owns (under FSD) into the center median with the front driver side of the vehicle struck the metal beam guardrail causing both air bags to deploy on the driver and left rear passenger sides. The car continued to move forward in the next 4-6 seconds under FSD (approximately 10-20 feet range) and then came to a complete stop with flashing warning screen asking driver to take over the steering wheel immediately.
NHTSA complaint #11751300 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
South Salem, NYCrash
LANE DEPARTURE: WARNING
Firstly, we were driving in the center lane on I-84W (three lanes), with Full Self Driving (FSD) at 55 mph. The car veered left on it owns (under FSD) into the center median with the front driver side of the vehicle struck the metal beam guardrail causing both air bags to deploy on the driver and left rear passenger sides. The car continued to move forward in the next 4-6 seconds under FSD (approximately 10-20 feet range) and then came to a complete stop with flashing warning screen asking driver to take over the steering wheel immediately.
NHTSA complaint #11751300 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Anna, TXCrash
LANE DEPARTURE: BLIND SPOT DETECTION
Incident involving my 2026 Tesla Model 3 equipped with HW4 hardware and the latest FSD (Supervised) software. During a garage reverse maneuver performed under FSD supervision, the vehicle had sufficient time to assess the surrounding environment before initiating the maneuver. There were no pedestrians or moving obstacles nearby. An adjacent parked vehicle was present next to the intended reversing path. During the maneuver, the vehicle made initial contact with the adjacent vehicle. At no point did the vehicle provide any collision warning, alert, or indication that a collision had occurred. After the initial contact, the vehicle continued moving and a second impact occurred shortly afterward, resulting in additional damage. Immediately after the second impact, the driver intervened and took control of the vehicle to stop the maneuver, before further damage is caused. My main concerns are: 1. Why did FSD fail to identify the adjacent vehicle before the maneuver? 2. Why was no collision warning provided before or after the initial contact? 3. Why did the vehicle continue the reversing maneuver after the first impact instead of stopping till driver intervention? 4. What if is pediatrician who qualify ADA, children, elder was in the position of the adjacent vehicle, this failed sensing would cause imparable result. I would appreciate a technical review of this event and a detailed explanation of Tesla’s findings.
NHTSA complaint #11749677 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Incident involving my 2026 Tesla Model 3 equipped with HW4 hardware and the latest FSD (Supervised) software. During a garage reverse maneuver performed under FSD supervision, the vehicle had sufficient time to assess the surrounding environment before initiating the maneuver. There were no pedestrians or moving obstacles nearby. An adjacent parked vehicle was present next to the intended reversing path. During the maneuver, the vehicle made initial contact with the adjacent vehicle. At no point did the vehicle provide any collision warning, alert, or indication that a collision had occurred. After the initial contact, the vehicle continued moving and a second impact occurred shortly afterward, resulting in additional damage. Immediately after the second impact, the driver intervened and took control of the vehicle to stop the maneuver, before further damage is caused. My main concerns are: 1. Why did FSD fail to identify the adjacent vehicle before the maneuver? 2. Why was no collision warning provided before or after the initial contact? 3. Why did the vehicle continue the reversing maneuver after the first impact instead of stopping till driver intervention? 4. What if is pediatrician who qualify ADA, children, elder was in the position of the adjacent vehicle, this failed sensing would cause imparable result. I would appreciate a technical review of this event and a detailed explanation of Tesla’s findings.
NHTSA complaint #11749677 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Anna, TXCrash
BACK OVER PREVENTION: WARNINGS
Incident involving my 2026 Tesla Model 3 equipped with HW4 hardware and the latest FSD (Supervised) software. During a garage reverse maneuver performed under FSD supervision, the vehicle had sufficient time to assess the surrounding environment before initiating the maneuver. There were no pedestrians or moving obstacles nearby. An adjacent parked vehicle was present next to the intended reversing path. During the maneuver, the vehicle made initial contact with the adjacent vehicle. At no point did the vehicle provide any collision warning, alert, or indication that a collision had occurred. After the initial contact, the vehicle continued moving and a second impact occurred shortly afterward, resulting in additional damage. Immediately after the second impact, the driver intervened and took control of the vehicle to stop the maneuver, before further damage is caused. My main concerns are: 1. Why did FSD fail to identify the adjacent vehicle before the maneuver? 2. Why was no collision warning provided before or after the initial contact? 3. Why did the vehicle continue the reversing maneuver after the first impact instead of stopping till driver intervention? 4. What if is pediatrician who qualify ADA, children, elder was in the position of the adjacent vehicle, this failed sensing would cause imparable result. I would appreciate a technical review of this event and a detailed explanation of Tesla’s findings.
NHTSA complaint #11749677 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
The most recent complaints
In the owners' own words, exactly as filed with NHTSA.
Sioux Falls, SD
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL
Driving on a 2 lane road going 65 with Traffic-Aware Cruise Control enabled at 65 MPH with a car behind and no car in front of us. the car phantom braked for no reason going from 65 to 40 mph in a matter of seconds. Luckily we were able to accelerate to avoid being rear ended
NHTSA complaint #11758118 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Oro Valley, AZ
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL
The vehicle is experiencing severe, unpredictable software and hardware regressions related to the Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system (v14.3.7, Software build 2026.21.5) that create an immediate, active traffic hazard and a high risk of rear-end collisions. Primary Safety Issues: 1. TRAFFIC STALLS UPON DISENGAGEMENT: When Full Self-Driving (FSD) is engaged, auxiliary sensors malfunction, causing the headlights to cycle on/off and windshield wipers to run at full speed in clear, dry, midday daylight. When attempting to manually disengage FSD to correct these malfunctioning systems, the vehicle fails to smoothly transition control. Instead, it triggers critical red flashing alert lights, sounds severe warning chimes, and initiates an immediate, aggressive brake application—stopping the vehicle dead in active, live traffic. 2. PHANTOM BRAKING: The vehicle routinely experiences sudden, severe, and unprovoked phantom braking events while driving at speed, without any forward obstacles or environmental hazards present. 3. STEERING INSTABILITY: When navigating parking lot entrances, the vehicle exhibits extreme "indecisive behavior," resulting in violent, rapid shaking of the steering wheel before completing the maneuver. Tesla customer service was formally notified of these dangerous system behaviors on August 14, 2026. A formal remote engineering log review has been requested from the manufacturer, as these sudden braking actions in active traffic pose an immediate threat to public safety.
NHTSA complaint #11757060 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Davenport, FL
WHEELS
I purchased my car on 3/23/26. Since delivery I have noticed that the car bounces at low speeds 20-30mph and the steering wheel vibrates at highway speeds 65 - 80mph. I have had the car to tesla service center 6 times since march. They have replaced all 4 tires, found and replaced a bent wheel (rim) on the passenger side. Then this last visit they replaced the passenger right wheel hub. They claim that when comparing it to the 1 other car available to road test my car was the same even though it still has the wheel vibration at highway speeds. they claim it falls within specs and is safe. I do not feel this is acceptable because they dont know what else to do. Now if I want them to check the car they say I must pay for any diagnosis and repairs if needed because they say they fixed the car. I do not feel safe driving at highway speeds as I am not sure what may happen which could endanger myself or passengers
NHTSA complaint #11755161 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Davenport, FL
STEERING
I purchased my car on 3/23/26. Since delivery I have noticed that the car bounces at low speeds 20-30mph and the steering wheel vibrates at highway speeds 65 - 80mph. I have had the car to tesla service center 6 times since march. They have replaced all 4 tires, found and replaced a bent wheel (rim) on the passenger side. Then this last visit they replaced the passenger right wheel hub. They claim that when comparing it to the 1 other car available to road test my car was the same even though it still has the wheel vibration at highway speeds. they claim it falls within specs and is safe. I do not feel this is acceptable because they dont know what else to do. Now if I want them to check the car they say I must pay for any diagnosis and repairs if needed because they say they fixed the car. I do not feel safe driving at highway speeds as I am not sure what may happen which could endanger myself or passengers
NHTSA complaint #11755161 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Davenport, FL
SUSPENSION
I purchased my car on 3/23/26. Since delivery I have noticed that the car bounces at low speeds 20-30mph and the steering wheel vibrates at highway speeds 65 - 80mph. I have had the car to tesla service center 6 times since march. They have replaced all 4 tires, found and replaced a bent wheel (rim) on the passenger side. Then this last visit they replaced the passenger right wheel hub. They claim that when comparing it to the 1 other car available to road test my car was the same even though it still has the wheel vibration at highway speeds. they claim it falls within specs and is safe. I do not feel this is acceptable because they dont know what else to do. Now if I want them to check the car they say I must pay for any diagnosis and repairs if needed because they say they fixed the car. I do not feel safe driving at highway speeds as I am not sure what may happen which could endanger myself or passengers
NHTSA complaint #11755161 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Sunrise, FL
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
The horn system on the new Tesla are not effective. Other drivers cannot hear The unit is facing the ground, and a high speed. Other drivers. Can I hear it specially when it’s raining. The use of the original point was effective and never had a problem on my previous last Tesla, or any other car for that matter. Please help before a serious. Ask her that happens.
NHTSA complaint #11754350 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Knoxville, TN
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
After a recent Tesla software update, a mandatory Full Self-Driving disengagement feedback window appears every time I disengage FSD while the vehicle is still moving. The feedback window covers a large portion of the display with a black overlay, noticeable enough something popped up. There is no setting to disable it, dismiss it immediately, or postpone the response until the vehicle is stopped. I am required to select a disengagement reason before I can access the controls and information behind the overlay. While this window is displayed, I cannot properly view or control functions such as music and other touchscreen features behind the area. This is especially dangerous because it appears immediately after I take manual control from FSD—a moment when my full attention should be on the road and the vehicle. The system effectively requires me to look away from the road and interact with the touchscreen before I can make another needed adjustment. This occurs every time I disengage FSD and is consistently reproducible. This behavior began after software version FSD v14.3.3. My vehicle is a 2026 Model 3. The problem occurred everytime while traveling at any speed. I believe this mandatory, non-dismissible overlay creates a serious driver-distraction hazard by obstructing the center display and requiring touchscreen interaction while the vehicle is in motion. Tesla should allow the feedback request to be dismissed, delayed until the vehicle is parked, or disabled entirely.
NHTSA complaint #11752822 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Knoxville, TN
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL
After a recent Tesla software update, a mandatory Full Self-Driving disengagement feedback window appears every time I disengage FSD while the vehicle is still moving. The feedback window covers a large portion of the display with a black overlay, noticeable enough something popped up. There is no setting to disable it, dismiss it immediately, or postpone the response until the vehicle is stopped. I am required to select a disengagement reason before I can access the controls and information behind the overlay. While this window is displayed, I cannot properly view or control functions such as music and other touchscreen features behind the area. This is especially dangerous because it appears immediately after I take manual control from FSD—a moment when my full attention should be on the road and the vehicle. The system effectively requires me to look away from the road and interact with the touchscreen before I can make another needed adjustment. This occurs every time I disengage FSD and is consistently reproducible. This behavior began after software version FSD v14.3.3. My vehicle is a 2026 Model 3. The problem occurred everytime while traveling at any speed. I believe this mandatory, non-dismissible overlay creates a serious driver-distraction hazard by obstructing the center display and requiring touchscreen interaction while the vehicle is in motion. Tesla should allow the feedback request to be dismissed, delayed until the vehicle is parked, or disabled entirely.
NHTSA complaint #11752822 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Cutler, ME
SUSPENSION
Air Suspension Failure - Damping Control Disabled (Code TAS_a313)" Description: "Vehicle is 2 days old. Suspension control module lost communication with CAN bus. Vehicle is in 'fail-safe' mode. Tesla Service Center has refused to assist. Safety risk due to loss of adaptive ride control." Manufacturer Response: "No response / Ignored."
NHTSA complaint #11752257 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
South Salem, NYCrash
STEERING
Firstly, we were driving in the center lane on I-84W (three lanes), with Full Self Driving (FSD) at 55 mph. The car veered left on it owns (under FSD) into the center median with the front driver side of the vehicle struck the metal beam guardrail causing both air bags to deploy on the driver and left rear passenger sides. The car continued to move forward in the next 4-6 seconds under FSD (approximately 10-20 feet range) and then came to a complete stop with flashing warning screen asking driver to take over the steering wheel immediately.
NHTSA complaint #11751300 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
South Salem, NYCrash
LANE DEPARTURE: ASSIST
Firstly, we were driving in the center lane on I-84W (three lanes), with Full Self Driving (FSD) at 55 mph. The car veered left on it owns (under FSD) into the center median with the front driver side of the vehicle struck the metal beam guardrail causing both air bags to deploy on the driver and left rear passenger sides. The car continued to move forward in the next 4-6 seconds under FSD (approximately 10-20 feet range) and then came to a complete stop with flashing warning screen asking driver to take over the steering wheel immediately.
NHTSA complaint #11751300 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
South Salem, NYCrash
LANE DEPARTURE: WARNING
Firstly, we were driving in the center lane on I-84W (three lanes), with Full Self Driving (FSD) at 55 mph. The car veered left on it owns (under FSD) into the center median with the front driver side of the vehicle struck the metal beam guardrail causing both air bags to deploy on the driver and left rear passenger sides. The car continued to move forward in the next 4-6 seconds under FSD (approximately 10-20 feet range) and then came to a complete stop with flashing warning screen asking driver to take over the steering wheel immediately.
NHTSA complaint #11751300 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Sunrise, FL
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
Complaint Title: Defective Horn System on 2026 Tesla Model 3 - Ineffective in Rain or Highway Conditions Description: The horn on my 2026 Tesla Model 3 Highland is dangerously inadequate. It uses a single pedestrian warning speaker instead of a proper horn, which is easily overpowered by road noise, tire noise from large trucks, and especially rain. I cannot reliably alert other drivers, including 18-wheelers, when they are drifting into my lane or failing to yield. This creates a serious safety risk in wet conditions and highway driving. Traditional horns have been effective for decades — this design fails basic safety expectations. I am requesting immediate investigation and a fix.
NHTSA complaint #11750177 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Sunrise, FL
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Complaint Title: Defective Horn System on 2026 Tesla Model 3 - Ineffective in Rain or Highway Conditions Description: The horn on my 2026 Tesla Model 3 Highland is dangerously inadequate. It uses a single pedestrian warning speaker instead of a proper horn, which is easily overpowered by road noise, tire noise from large trucks, and especially rain. I cannot reliably alert other drivers, including 18-wheelers, when they are drifting into my lane or failing to yield. This creates a serious safety risk in wet conditions and highway driving. Traditional horns have been effective for decades — this design fails basic safety expectations. I am requesting immediate investigation and a fix.
NHTSA complaint #11750177 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Anna, TXCrash
LANE DEPARTURE: BLIND SPOT DETECTION
Incident involving my 2026 Tesla Model 3 equipped with HW4 hardware and the latest FSD (Supervised) software. During a garage reverse maneuver performed under FSD supervision, the vehicle had sufficient time to assess the surrounding environment before initiating the maneuver. There were no pedestrians or moving obstacles nearby. An adjacent parked vehicle was present next to the intended reversing path. During the maneuver, the vehicle made initial contact with the adjacent vehicle. At no point did the vehicle provide any collision warning, alert, or indication that a collision had occurred. After the initial contact, the vehicle continued moving and a second impact occurred shortly afterward, resulting in additional damage. Immediately after the second impact, the driver intervened and took control of the vehicle to stop the maneuver, before further damage is caused. My main concerns are: 1. Why did FSD fail to identify the adjacent vehicle before the maneuver? 2. Why was no collision warning provided before or after the initial contact? 3. Why did the vehicle continue the reversing maneuver after the first impact instead of stopping till driver intervention? 4. What if is pediatrician who qualify ADA, children, elder was in the position of the adjacent vehicle, this failed sensing would cause imparable result. I would appreciate a technical review of this event and a detailed explanation of Tesla’s findings.
NHTSA complaint #11749677 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Incident involving my 2026 Tesla Model 3 equipped with HW4 hardware and the latest FSD (Supervised) software. During a garage reverse maneuver performed under FSD supervision, the vehicle had sufficient time to assess the surrounding environment before initiating the maneuver. There were no pedestrians or moving obstacles nearby. An adjacent parked vehicle was present next to the intended reversing path. During the maneuver, the vehicle made initial contact with the adjacent vehicle. At no point did the vehicle provide any collision warning, alert, or indication that a collision had occurred. After the initial contact, the vehicle continued moving and a second impact occurred shortly afterward, resulting in additional damage. Immediately after the second impact, the driver intervened and took control of the vehicle to stop the maneuver, before further damage is caused. My main concerns are: 1. Why did FSD fail to identify the adjacent vehicle before the maneuver? 2. Why was no collision warning provided before or after the initial contact? 3. Why did the vehicle continue the reversing maneuver after the first impact instead of stopping till driver intervention? 4. What if is pediatrician who qualify ADA, children, elder was in the position of the adjacent vehicle, this failed sensing would cause imparable result. I would appreciate a technical review of this event and a detailed explanation of Tesla’s findings.
NHTSA complaint #11749677 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Anna, TXCrash
BACK OVER PREVENTION: WARNINGS
Incident involving my 2026 Tesla Model 3 equipped with HW4 hardware and the latest FSD (Supervised) software. During a garage reverse maneuver performed under FSD supervision, the vehicle had sufficient time to assess the surrounding environment before initiating the maneuver. There were no pedestrians or moving obstacles nearby. An adjacent parked vehicle was present next to the intended reversing path. During the maneuver, the vehicle made initial contact with the adjacent vehicle. At no point did the vehicle provide any collision warning, alert, or indication that a collision had occurred. After the initial contact, the vehicle continued moving and a second impact occurred shortly afterward, resulting in additional damage. Immediately after the second impact, the driver intervened and took control of the vehicle to stop the maneuver, before further damage is caused. My main concerns are: 1. Why did FSD fail to identify the adjacent vehicle before the maneuver? 2. Why was no collision warning provided before or after the initial contact? 3. Why did the vehicle continue the reversing maneuver after the first impact instead of stopping till driver intervention? 4. What if is pediatrician who qualify ADA, children, elder was in the position of the adjacent vehicle, this failed sensing would cause imparable result. I would appreciate a technical review of this event and a detailed explanation of Tesla’s findings.
NHTSA complaint #11749677 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Sandown, NH
LANE DEPARTURE: ASSIST
Lane keeping assistance turns on with every drive no matter how many times I set it to off. Where I live there are many potholes and poorly paved roads, along with poorly marked roads. As I am swerving around obstacles the car will fight the steering inputs I am giving it, trying to steer me back into whatever I was avoiding. This is a safety issue, and is not a problem on our older Tesla model 3 performance, as once that vehicle is set to off, it stays off. Now, as I start every drive I am navigating through a couple screens to turn off this "safety" feature.
NHTSA complaint #11748263 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Woodland, CA1 injured
STRUCTURE:BODY
While the vehicle was parked outdoors and the powered rear trunk lid was fully open, I leaned/bent forward into the trunk to retrieve an item. The edge of the trunk lid near the taillight assembly made contact with my scalp, causing a laceration. The wound bled significantly。The trunk lid’s fully-open position, combined with the geometry/edge of the liftgate near the taillight, creates a head-strike hazard for an average-height adult bending into the cargo area. I am requesting that NHTSA investigate whether the powered trunk lid’s open-position geometry presents an unreasonable risk of head injury to vehicle occupants/owners during normal use.
NHTSA complaint #11745391 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
East Windsor, NJ
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
Tesla Model 3 Full Self-Driving (Supervised) feature I was using Self-Driving mode in my Tesla Model 3 while traveling on [XXX]. The vehicle suddenly turned right without warning, struck a mailbox, broke the right-side mirror, and came to a complete stop. There were no vehicles in front of or behind my car at the time of the incident. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint #11744965 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Millbrae, CACrash
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
We bought the new 2026 Tesla Model 3 and picked it up on 5/3/2026. The next date 5/4/2026, I was trying to drive it to work. I got in the car and used the Tesla’s Full Self-Driving function and let it drive the car by itself. It started moving forward and tried to make a U turn. Since there was not enough space for it to make a U turn because there was a car parked on the sidewalk, so it stopped for a moment. But unfortunately, it continued to move forward and hit the car parked on the sidewalk. It supposedly backed up a little after the stop, but it didn’t detect the car parked on the sidewalk and still moved forward and hit the parked car. The Tesla's FSD is malfunctioning and caused my accident because there was such a big car in front and it didn't detect it and still hit it.
NHTSA complaint #11741020 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Gig Harbor, WACrash
LANE DEPARTURE: BLIND SPOT DETECTION
The vehicle's Full Self-Driving (FSD) system was actively controlling the vehicle while executing a reverse maneuver into a residential garage — a routine the system had successfully performed on multiple prior occasions. During this session, the FSD system misjudged the maneuver and the vehicle struck the wall of the garage, causing damage. The failed component is the FSD software/sensor system. The vehicle is available for inspection upon request. Safety was put at risk because the system was in full control of vehicle movement in a confined space. The unexpected behavior did not provide sufficient time for the supervising driver to intervene before impact. No warning lamps or messages appeared prior to the failure. The system gave no indication it would behave differently from previous successful executions of the same maneuver. The incident has not yet been confirmed by a dealer or inspected by the manufacturer, though a vehicle incident data report has been requested from Tesla.
NHTSA complaint #11733346 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
The vehicle's Full Self-Driving (FSD) system was actively controlling the vehicle while executing a reverse maneuver into a residential garage — a routine the system had successfully performed on multiple prior occasions. During this session, the FSD system misjudged the maneuver and the vehicle struck the wall of the garage, causing damage. The failed component is the FSD software/sensor system. The vehicle is available for inspection upon request. Safety was put at risk because the system was in full control of vehicle movement in a confined space. The unexpected behavior did not provide sufficient time for the supervising driver to intervene before impact. No warning lamps or messages appeared prior to the failure. The system gave no indication it would behave differently from previous successful executions of the same maneuver. The incident has not yet been confirmed by a dealer or inspected by the manufacturer, though a vehicle incident data report has been requested from Tesla.
NHTSA complaint #11733346 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Gig Harbor, WACrash
BACK OVER PREVENTION: WARNINGS
The vehicle's Full Self-Driving (FSD) system was actively controlling the vehicle while executing a reverse maneuver into a residential garage — a routine the system had successfully performed on multiple prior occasions. During this session, the FSD system misjudged the maneuver and the vehicle struck the wall of the garage, causing damage. The failed component is the FSD software/sensor system. The vehicle is available for inspection upon request. Safety was put at risk because the system was in full control of vehicle movement in a confined space. The unexpected behavior did not provide sufficient time for the supervising driver to intervene before impact. No warning lamps or messages appeared prior to the failure. The system gave no indication it would behave differently from previous successful executions of the same maneuver. The incident has not yet been confirmed by a dealer or inspected by the manufacturer, though a vehicle incident data report has been requested from Tesla.
NHTSA complaint #11733346 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Newton, MACrash2 injured
SEAT BELTS
I was involved in a rear-end collision while stopped at an intersection. The impact was significant. During the crash, the front airbags did not deploy. More importantly, the seat belts in both front seats (driver and front passenger) failed to function as expected. Instead of tightening during impact, the seat belts appeared to loosen, allowing excessive forward movement of the occupants. As a result, I was thrown forward and struck the steering wheel. The lack of seat belt pretensioning raises serious concerns about a potential failure of the vehicle’s restraint system. This incident suggests that the seat belt pretensioners and/or related crash detection systems may not have activated properly under a significant collision event. I am concerned that this represents a safety defect that could increase the risk of injury in a crash. I request that this incident be investigated as a possible failure of the restraint system, including seat belt pretensioners and crash sensing mechanisms.
NHTSA complaint #11732730 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.