EXTERIOR LIGHTING:HEADLIGHTS
2021 Tesla Model Y
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Overview
Our database contains 1,052 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2021 Tesla Model Y, most frequently naming the driver assistance, brakes and electrical categories. 23 safety recalls have been issued covering this model year; 15 NHTSA investigations name it; and 94 manufacturer communications are on file.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Complaint activity over time
When owners filed reports about this model year
View as table
| Month | Complaints filed | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2021 | 8 | 74 |
| Oct 2021 | 6 | 80 |
| Nov 2021 | 31 | 111 |
| Dec 2021 | 26 | 137 |
| Jan 2022 | 26 | 163 |
| Feb 2022 | 216 | 379 |
| Mar 2022 | 39 | 418 |
| Apr 2022 | 19 | 437 |
| May 2022 | 16 | 453 |
| Jun 2022 | 58 | 511 |
| Jul 2022 | 15 | 526 |
| Aug 2022 | 23 | 549 |
| Sep 2022 | 16 | 565 |
| Oct 2022 | 22 | 587 |
| Nov 2022 | 20 | 607 |
| Dec 2022 | 18 | 625 |
| Jan 2023 | 18 | 643 |
| Feb 2023 | 15 | 658 |
| Mar 2023 | 21 | 679 |
| Apr 2023 | 17 | 696 |
| May 2023 | 13 | 709 |
| Jun 2023 | 13 | 722 |
| Jul 2023 | 13 | 735 |
| Aug 2023 | 20 | 755 |
| Sep 2023 | 9 | 764 |
| Oct 2023 | 8 | 772 |
| Nov 2023 | 13 | 785 |
| Dec 2023 | 10 | 795 |
| Jan 2024 | 10 | 805 |
| Feb 2024 | 9 | 814 |
| Mar 2024 | 3 | 817 |
| Apr 2024 | 9 | 826 |
| May 2024 | 11 | 837 |
| Jun 2024 | 9 | 846 |
| Jul 2024 | 4 | 850 |
| Aug 2024 | 7 | 857 |
| Sep 2024 | 5 | 862 |
| Oct 2024 | 13 | 875 |
| Nov 2024 | 9 | 884 |
| Dec 2024 | 4 | 888 |
| Jan 2025 | 7 | 895 |
| Feb 2025 | 5 | 900 |
| Mar 2025 | 6 | 906 |
| Apr 2025 | 5 | 911 |
| May 2025 | 7 | 918 |
| Jun 2025 | 8 | 926 |
| Jul 2025 | 7 | 933 |
| Aug 2025 | 7 | 940 |
| Sep 2025 | 14 | 954 |
| Oct 2025 | 8 | 962 |
| Nov 2025 | 10 | 972 |
| Dec 2025 | 7 | 979 |
| Jan 2026 | 11 | 990 |
| Feb 2026 | 9 | 999 |
| Mar 2026 | 3 | 1,002 |
| Apr 2026 | 9 | 1,011 |
| May 2026 | 8 | 1,019 |
| Jun 2026 | 12 | 1,031 |
| Jul 2026 | 10 | 1,041 |
| Aug 2026 | 11 | 1,052 |
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
- Driver assistance64347.1%
- Brakes18113.3%
- Electrical14210.4%
- Steering856.2%
- Suspension654.8%
- Visibility503.7%
- Interior & seats352.6%
- Body & structure302.2%
Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.
Safety recalls
23 campaigns cover this model year
Recalls apply to specific vehicles, not to every vehicle of a model year. Check your VIN with NHTSA or your manufacturer's dealer to confirm whether a recall affects your vehicle.
Check a VIN on NHTSA.govBACK OVER PREVENTION:SOFTWARE
TIRES:PRESSURE MONITORING AND REGULATING SYSTEMS
Safety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
Lower Lateral Link detachment
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received 156 complaints alleging a suspension failure in model year (MY) 2018-2020 Model 3 and MY 2021-2023 Model Y vehicles. The suspension failure involves the detachment of the front lower lateral link, which potentially causes a loss of vehicle directional control. In most cases, there was no advance warning or indication that the suspension failure would occur. Some cases cite noises occurring prior to failure, but note that the vehicle provides no visual warnings. Once the failure occurs, the vehicle may not be drivable, thus requiring a tow. Tesla has previously recalled vehicles for lateral link detachments through two recalls. Recall 21V-835 addressed 2,791 MY2019-2021 Tesla Model 3 vehicles due to a production issue. Recall 23V-235 addressed 422 2018-2019 Tesla Model 3 vehicles that had experienced similar failures to those recalled under 21V-835. The subject failures for this investigation exceed the scope of these recalls and do not appear to be related to the production issue that prompted those recalls. ODI is opening this Preliminary Evaluation to determine the underlying cause, scope, and severity of the potential problem and to fully assess the potential safety-related issues. To review the ODI reports cited in the Opening Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
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 capabilities of the updates, and Tesla’s assessment of their safety impact. Tesla’s FSD is an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) that relies exclusively on vision-based cameras and the related FSD software to detect and respond to the roadway ahead, projecting a path forward based on traffic control devices, vehicles, pedestrians, and the roadway itself. When Tesla began transitioning away from using both cameras and radars to an exclusively camera-based approach, known as Tesla Vision, in mid-2021, it developed and implemented a degradation detection system that it deployed by a software update to existing and new Tesla vehicles. On June 28, 2024, the day after Tesla submitted the SGO report of the November 28, 2023 fatal crash listed in this document, Tesla began developing an update to the degradation detection system. At this time, ODI does not have information on when the update was deployed and which vehicles have the updated system. ODI discussed individual incidents and its initial findings during the PE phase of its investigation with Tesla. As part of those discussions, Tesla’s post-incident analysis indicated that the update to the degradation detection system, had it been installed on the vehicles at the time, may have affected 3 of the 9 incidents identified by ODI. Tesla also described internal data and labeling limitations that prevented a uniform identification and analysis of crash events with the subject system engaged. ODI believes this limitation could have led to under-reporting of subject crashes over portions of the defined time-period. Available incident data raise concerns that Tesla’s degradation detection system, both as originally deployed and later updated, fails to detect and/or warn the driver appropriately under degraded visibility conditions such as glare and airborne obscurants. In the crashes that ODI has reviewed, the system did not detect common roadway conditions that impaired camera visibility and/or provide alerts when camera performance had deteriorated until immediately before the crash occurred. Review of Tesla’s responses revealed additional crashes that occurred in similar environments and where the system either did not detect a degraded state, and/or it did not present the driver with an alert with adequate time for the driver to react. In each of these crashes, FSD also lost track of or never detected a lead vehicle in its path. In upgrading PE24031 to an Engineering Analysis (EA), ODI will gather further information on the updated degradation detection system, including the status of updating vehicles and scope of compatible vehicles, the system’s visibility degradation detection capability, and alerts or warnings to the driver. Lastly, ODI will conduct analysis on six recent potentially related incidents. These incidents can be found at NHTSA.gov under the following SGO report identification numbers: 13781-11937, 13781-13211, 13781-13569, 13781-13633, 13781-13693, 13781-13788. The crashes included in the failure report summary can be found at NHTSA.gov under the following SGO report identification numbers: 13781-8004, 13781-7181, 13781-7381, 13781-7767, 13781-7964, 13781-8977, 13781-9267.
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 of the driving task, requiring a driver to supervise and intervene as necessary. The driver remains fully responsible at all times for driving the vehicle, including complying with applicable traffic laws. ODI’s investigation will therefore focus, in particular, on whether certain driving inputs within the control authority of FSD forestall the driver’s supervision when they are unexpectedly performed. ODI has identified a number of incidents in which the inputs to the dynamic driving task commanded by FSD induced vehicle behavior that violated traffic safety laws. Although reports of this nature span a variety of behaviors, the reports appear to most commonly involve two types of scenarios. The first type of scenario involves a vehicle operating with FSD proceeding into an intersection in violation of a red traffic signal. The second type of scenario involves FSD commanding a lane change into an opposing lane of traffic. With respect to the first type of scenario, ODI has identified 18 complaints and 1 media report alleging that a Tesla vehicle, operating at an intersection with FSD engaged, failed to remain stopped for the duration of a red traffic signal, failed to stop fully, or failed to accurately detect and display the correct traffic signal state in the vehicle interface. Some complainants also alleged that FSD did not provide warnings of the system's intended behavior as the vehicle was approaching a red traffic signal. ODI has identified six Standing General Order ("SGO") reports in which a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, approached an intersection with a red traffic signal, continued to travel into the intersection against the red light and was subsequently involved in a crash with other motor vehicles in the intersection. Of these incidents, four crashes resulted in one or more reported injuries. At least some of the incidents appeared to involve FSD proceeding into the intersection after coming to a complete stop. ODI's pre-investigative work, including coordination with the Maryland Transportation Authority and State Police, indicated that the problem may be repeatable, given that multiple subject incidents occurred at the same intersection in Joppa, Maryland. NHTSA understands that Tesla has since taken action to address the issue at this intersection. With respect to the second type of scenario, ODI has identified 2 SGO reports, 18 complaints, and 2 media reports alleging that a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, entered opposing lanes of travel during or following a turn, crossed double-yellow lane markings while proceeding straight, or attempted to turn onto a road in the wrong direction despite the presence of wrong-way road signs. Likewise, ODI has identified 4 SGO reports, 6 complaints, and 1 media report alleging that a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, proceeded straight through an intersection in a turn-only lane or executed a turn at an intersection in a through lane despite the presence of lane markings or signals. Complaints also alleged that FSD did not provide warnings of the system's intended behavior. Some complaints alleged that more than one of these failures occurred and, as such, the numbers are not cumulative. Some of the reported incidents appeared to involve FSD executing a lane change into an opposing lane of travel with little notice to a driver or opportunity to intervene. ODI’s review will assess whether there was prior warning or adequate time for the driver to respond to the unexpected behavior or to safely supervise the automated driving task. This review will assess any warnings to the driver about the system's impending behavior; the time given to drivers to respond; the capability of FSD to detect, display to the driver, and respond appropriately to traffic signals; and the capability of FSD to detect and respond to lane markings and wrong-way signage. NHTSA's review will also consider any updates or modifications to the system(s) that may affect the performance of FSD with respect to obeying traffic safety laws and signals. This assessment will focus, in particular, on the types of traffic safety violations described above, as most reports identified thus far have centered around those behaviors. While the behaviors under investigation appear to occur most frequently at intersections, NHTSA’s investigation will encompass any other types of situations in which this behavior may arise, such as when traveling adjacent to a lane of opposing traffic or when approaching railroad crossings. If other evidence received during this investigation involve other types of traffic safety violations, those may be considered as part of this assessment as well. To review the ODI reports cited in the Opening Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov. The SGO reports cited in this Resume are listed below by report ID and are available for download at NHTSA.gov/laws-regulations/standing-general-order-crash-reporting. 13781-8739-1, 13781-8995-1, 13781-9623-1, 13781-10333-1, 13781-10872-1, 13781-10930-1, 13781-10939-1, 13781-10941-1, 13781-11069-1, 13781-11305-1, 13781-11579-1 Media reported allegations included as a separate attachment.
Electronic door handles become inoperative
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received nine Vehicle Owners Questionnaires (VOQs) reporting an inability to open doors on Model Year (MY) 2021 Tesla Model Y vehicles. The most commonly reported scenarios involved parents exiting the vehicle after a drive cycle in order to remove a child from the back seat or placing a child in the back seat before starting a drive cycle. In those events, the parents were unable to reopen a door to regain access to the vehicle. Four of these VOQs reported resorting to breaking a window to regain entry into the vehicle. Although Tesla vehicles have manual door releases inside of the cabin, in these situations, a child may not be able to access or operate the releases even if the vehicle’s driver is aware of them. As a result, in these instances, an occupant who remains inside a vehicle in this condition may be unable to be rapidly retrieved by persons outside of the vehicle. Entrapment in a vehicle is particularly concerning in emergency situations, such as when children are entrapped in a hot vehicle. For awareness, NHTSA has a Child Heatstroke Campaign that highlights the dangers to children entrapped in hot vehicles. Based on ODI’s preliminary review, this condition appears to occur when the electronic door locks receive insufficient voltage from the vehicle. Available repair invoices report replacement of the vehicle’s low voltage battery after the incident. However, no VOQs reported seeing a low voltage battery warning prior to the exterior door handles becoming inoperative. The Tesla Owner’s Manual “Jump Starting” and “Opening the Hood with No Power” sections describe a multi-step process for restoring power to the electronic door locks in order to enable their operation from outside of the vehicle. This process requires applying 12 volts DC from a separate power source to two different points accessible from the vehicle’s exterior.The subject incidents suggest that this process may not be readily available to owners or well known. For instances where an occupant is able to access and operate interior door handles, the Tesla Owner’s Manual “Opening Doors with No Power” section identifies the manual door releases inside of the vehicle’s cabin. ODI is opening this Preliminary Evaluation (PE) to assess the scope and severity of this condition, including the risks that arise from the conditions reported in the VOQs. This investigation will also assess the approach used by Tesla to supply power to the door locks and the reliability of the applicable power supplies. At this time, NHTSA’s investigation is focused on the operability of the electronic door locks from outside of the vehicle as that circumstance is the only one in which there is no manual way to open the door. The agency will continue to monitor any reports of entrapment involving opening doors from inside of the vehicle, and ODI will take further action as needed. To review the ODI reports cited in the Opening Resume and the ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
On 8/10/26, my Tesla experienced a complete low-voltage electrical failure while parked at my home. I owned the vehicle 34 days and put 1,054 miles on it after purchasing it directly from Tesla as a pre-owned vehicle. I entered the driver's seat, and closed the driver's door. The center touchscreen was completely black, the vehicle would not power on, and the Tesla mobile app could not control the vehicle. I attempted to exit the vehicle, but the electronic driver's-door release would not operate. My husband was outside the vehicle and was also unable to open the driver's door from the exterior. The outside temperature was approximately 80 degrees, and the interior of the vehicle became increasingly warmer. For several minutes, we attempted to open the driver's door, lower a window, or restore power without success. I had not been shown or instructed on the location or operation of the manual emergency door release when Tesla delivered the vehicle. I ultimately had to climb over the center console to the passenger side and push the passenger door open with both feet. Tesla Roadside Assistance was contacted and the vehicle was towed to the Tesla Service Center. Tesla's 8/12/2026 service record documents the concern as "Parked vehicle unable to power on" and states that the technician found the 12V battery inoperative. Tesla replaced the 12V lead-acid battery assembly. During the same service visit, Tesla also replaced the left-front door glass and upper trim. Tesla separately verified that the passenger-side window had come out of its track and scratched the trim and documented that the cause was a loose and improperly seated front-right door trim panel. I received no warning on the vehicle display or through the Tesla app before the low-voltage battery failed. My primary safety concern is that loss of low-voltage power disabled the normal electronic means of exiting the driver's door while I was inside the vehicle, with no advance warning.
- NHTSA ID
- 11756565
- Incident
- Aug 10, 2026
The high-voltage battery failed unexpectedly shortly after the warranty expired (with only 9,000 miles past warranty). Tesla Service confirmed a main high-voltage battery defect and quoted a full battery replacement. A sudden high-voltage battery failure causes a complete loss of propulsion/power, creating a severe collision and safety hazard on public roads. There were no prior warnings until the system suddenly failed and rendered the vehicle inoperable. The vehicle is currently available for inspection. This appears to be a premature latent defect in 2021 model high-voltage battery packs.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755660
- Incident
- Aug 3, 2026
Separately, the system could not hold a consistent speed on open highway with no vehicle ahead. It would surge from a set 70 mph to roughly 72-73 mph and then drop back, repeatedly, producing a pulsing acceleration and deceleration. The system also hesitated frequently and issued repeated audible alerts without an identifiable hazard present. I previously filed a complaint regarding phantom braking on this same vehicle (ODI number 11450326, filed February 4, 2022), which described nearly identical behavior triggered by trucks on the same Georgia-to-New Jersey route. That complaint concerned FSD/Autopilot software from 2022. The behavior described here occurs on Tesla’s current v14 Lite software released to Hardware 3 vehicles in July 2026. The defect has persisted across more than four years and multiple software generations. Unexpected hard braking at highway speed with no hazard present creates a rear-end collision risk to my vehicle and to following traffic.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755578
- Incident
- Aug 1, 2026
The contact owns a 2021 Tesla Model Y. The contact stated that while the vehicle was parked, there was an abnormal sound while turning the steering wheel to the left or the right. There was no warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, and the contact was informed that the lower and upper control arms were failing. The contact was informed that the lower and upper control arms needed to be replaced. The contact was advised to take the vehicle to the dealer. The dealer was made aware of the failure. The contact stated that a service appointment was scheduled. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 100,000.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755463
- Incident
- Jul 24, 2026
- Mileage
- 100,000 mi
Front suspension makes creaking noises for a few months now. The car only makes noises when steering wheel is turned while reversing and sometimes when turning. Took the car to Tesla and they told me since the sound is not that loud and not really reproducible, then to bring it back when it gets worse. My car only has 34k miles on it.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755436
- Incident
- Apr 15, 2026
Noises started coming from suspension and I had an independent shop verify the issue. The lower control arm had separated from bushing and rubbing against subframe.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755186
- Incident
- Jul 15, 2026
Description of Safety Incident:The front passenger safety restraint system failed, displaying the warning alert: "Seats - Front passenger safety restraint system fault / Service is required." This alert disables or suppresses the front passenger airbag and seatbelt restraint system, creating a direct safety hazard for front-seat occupants.Service History & Recurring Defect:On February 26, 2025 (at 50,596 miles), Tesla Service Center diagnosed an open circuit in the front passenger seat harness/back frame. Under Service Bulletin / SRS Warranty, Tesla replaced the front seat back, seat harness assembly (PN: 1489060-03-G), occupancy sensor (PN: 1099592-00-F), and SBR sensor clip (PN: 1130363-00-B). On August 1, 2026 (at 63,583 miles)—less than 13,000 miles after the initial replacement—the exact same safety restraint system fault recurred.Safety Concern:The front passenger seat harness and Occupant Classification System (OCS) appear to suffer from design strain, pinching, or premature wiring degradation during normal seat movement. Because this defect disables critical safety restraint components and recurs shortly after replacement, I am submitting this report to request a federal safety review and investigation regarding Tesla Model Y front passenger seat wiring harness integrity.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755028
- Incident
- Feb 25, 2025
Vehicle can become difficult to steer in certain situations
- NHTSA ID
- 11754876
- Incident
- Jul 25, 2026
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
SUSPENSION
A firmware diagnosis feature is being introduced on Model 3 and Model Y vehicles that monitors wheel alignment over time. This feature detects changes in wheel alignment that may be related to incorrect tire pressures, degraded ball joints, bushings or damaged suspension links. If the feature determines that an inspection at a Tesla Service Center is required, a customer-facing alert will appear on the touchscreen.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
On certain Model S, Model X and Model Y vehicles, the interior camera requires replacement to mitigate reduced driver attentiveness detection performance in low-light conditions.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
On certain Model S, Model X and Model Y vehicles, the interior camera requires replacement to mitigate reduced driver attentiveness detection performance in low-light conditions.
STRUCTURE:BODY
On certain Model Y vehicles, the LH and/or RH rear primary body seals might cause wind noise in the cabin.
Tesla does not provide physical owner's manual copies. Instead, all available owner’s manual content is integrated into the vehicle software, and only the content relevant for a given vehicle, based on vehicle configuration and software version installed, is displayed on its touchscreen. This file contains all available owner’s manual content for the vehicle converted to PDF format, and given the distribution method and NHTSA’s submission format requirements, it is the best available representative copy of owner’s manual content. However, a customer who accesses the owner’s manual via their vehicle’s touchscreen would only see the parts of this PDF file that are relevant to their vehicle.
Tesla does not provide physical owner's manual copies. Instead, all available owner’s manual content is integrated into the vehicle software, and only the content relevant for a given vehicle, based on vehicle configuration and software version installed, is displayed on its touchscreen. This file contains all available owner’s manual content for the vehicle converted to PDF format, and given the distribution method and NHTSA’s submission format requirements, it is the best available representative copy of owner’s manual content. However, a customer who accesses the owner’s manual via their vehicle’s touchscreen would only see the parts of this PDF file that are relevant to their vehicle.
Manufacturers file copies of the bulletins they send to dealers with NHTSA. These often describe diagnostic or repair procedures for a known condition. They are not recalls: repairs described in a bulletin are usually only free if the vehicle is still under warranty or the manufacturer has extended coverage.
Compare model years
Complaint and recall counts across every year of this model
Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers. Older model years have had longer for reports to accumulate.