2017 Tesla Model S problems

STEERING

Backing out of driveway, the steering wheel was very hard to turn. The dash indicated the steering assist feature wasn't working. After restarting the software and the problem persisting, I investigated the assist motor/pump and found that the ground to the chassis was very corroded. I attempted to remove the nut to clean contacts and it sheared off. The grounding post had corroded through (white galvanic corrosion). I attached the assist motor ground to another point on the chassis and the power steering worked again.

NHTSA complaint #11757600 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

LANE DEPARTURE: WARNING

Backing out of driveway, the steering wheel was very hard to turn. The dash indicated the steering assist feature wasn't working. After restarting the software and the problem persisting, I investigated the assist motor/pump and found that the ground to the chassis was very corroded. I attempted to remove the nut to clean contacts and it sheared off. The grounding post had corroded through (white galvanic corrosion). I attached the assist motor ground to another point on the chassis and the power steering worked again.

NHTSA complaint #11757600 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

2017 Tesla Model S P100D. Vehicle received a paid MCU2 infotainment upgrade (MCU1 to MCU2), which replaced both the center touchscreen computer and the instrument cluster. The original MCU1 architecture used an independent computer for the instrument cluster, providing redundancy. The MCU2 retrofit consolidated both displays onto a single processor with no fallback mode. The first MCU2 replacement unit experienced a touchscreen digitizer failure — touch input stopped responding but the displays remained powered and the instrument cluster continued to function. Tesla replaced it with a second MCU2 unit. The second MCU2 unit has experienced three complete blackout events where both the center display and the instrument cluster simultaneously lose all power — no backlight, no image, no data. One of these events occurred while driving at speed on the road. I lost all instrumentation: speedometer, gear indicator, turn signal feedback, warning lamps, backup camera, and climate controls. I had to pull over with no way to confirm my speed or signal to other drivers. The vehicle remained mechanically drivable — steering, brakes, and motor continued to function. During the recent blackout a few days back, the vehicle had been stored in a closed garage and was not heat-soaked. I have video evidence of the car with both screens completely dead while the vehicle is in gear and moving. A scroll-wheel reboot restored the screens each time. This is my fourth service visit to Tesla for this upgrade. The MCU2 architecture provides no independent fallback display for critical safety information such as speed, gear state, or warning indicators during a processor crash. The prior MCU1 system maintained instrument cluster functionality independently of the infotainment computer.

NHTSA complaint #11755807 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

My Tesla wouldn’t charge at Level 3, 2, or 1 charger resulting in the need for the tow and further service hours. Following the service I was told it was a software issue and that a power cycle resolved the issue which locked out the charging. It’s deeply concerning and baffling that this could happen at anytime resulting in days or weeks or down time for what is ultimately a software issue. This is my fourth hardware related software issue following a Tesla update.

NHTSA complaint #11752080 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

STRUCTURE:BODY

Trunk latch fails, trunk latch safety mechanism also failed so manual release does not work. This is a safety issue

NHTSA complaint #11745960 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

STEERING

This happens about 30%to 40% of the time when using Full Self Driving Supervised on HW3, FSD version 12.6.4, software version 2026.14.6. When changing marked lanes to the right, either initiated by FSD or the driver asking FSD to move to the right by engaging the right turn signals, it will do one of 2 things: 1. Change lanes properly about 70% of the time 2. Start and abort the lane. Hange swerving back and forth between the 2 lanes, ot 3. Does nothing and drives straight without changing lanes, all the while with the turn signals on. #2 is particularly dangerous.

NHTSA complaint #11744026 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL

This happens about 30%to 40% of the time when using Full Self Driving Supervised on HW3, FSD version 12.6.4, software version 2026.14.6. When changing marked lanes to the right, either initiated by FSD or the driver asking FSD to move to the right by engaging the right turn signals, it will do one of 2 things: 1. Change lanes properly about 70% of the time 2. Start and abort the lane. Hange swerving back and forth between the 2 lanes, ot 3. Does nothing and drives straight without changing lanes, all the while with the turn signals on. #2 is particularly dangerous.

NHTSA complaint #11744026 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: WARNINGS

Using FSD. Stopped at a stop sign making a UPL into a 4-lane 35 MPH posted street. TWICE now there was a small opening which would require an aggressive accelerator - it started the turn stopping a full car length into the first lane and decides it's going to wait for closing traffic from the right. Obviously stopping in the middle of new oncoming traffic from the left is not very wise. This has happened 3 times with 2026.8.3 and I've never seen it before - twice i gunned it to force the short turn but missed it once. Definitely a pucker maneuver.

NHTSA complaint #11733796 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

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.

NHTSA complaint #11723641 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

UNKNOWN OR OTHER

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)

NHTSA complaint #11718165 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

SUSPENSION

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.

NHTSA complaint #11714816 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

UNKNOWN OR OTHER

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)

NHTSA complaint #11710572 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL

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)

NHTSA complaint #11710572 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

LANE DEPARTURE: WARNING

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)

NHTSA complaint #11710572 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

POWER TRAIN

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.

NHTSA complaint #11701872 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

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.

NHTSA complaint #11701872 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM

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.

NHTSA complaint #11701872 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

STEERING

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)

NHTSA complaint #11701035 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

UNKNOWN OR OTHER

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)

NHTSA complaint #11701035 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

SUSPENSION

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)

NHTSA complaint #11701035 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

STEERING

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.

NHTSA complaint #11701014 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

SUSPENSION

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.

NHTSA complaint #11701014 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

POWER TRAIN

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)

NHTSA complaint #11699154 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.