2025 Tesla Model Y

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.

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.

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 single batch, while others were submitted on a rolling basis. Preliminary engagement between ODI and Tesla on the issue indicates that the timing of the reports was due to an issue with Tesla’s data collection, which, according to Tesla, has now been fixed. NHTSA is opening this Audit Query, a standard process for reviewing compliance with legal requirements, to evaluate the cause of the potential delays in reporting, the scope of any such delays, and the mitigations that Tesla has developed to address them. As part of this review, NHTSA will assess whether any reports of prior incidents remain outstanding and whether the reports that were submitted include all of the required and available data. The SGO reports cited in the Opening Resume, can be found at NHTSA.gov/SGOCrashReporting under the following SGO 2021-01 report IDs: 13781-11020-1 13781-10844-1 13781-10843-1 13781-10530-1 13781-10160-1 13781-10159-1 13781-10157-1 13781-10146-1 13781-10122-1 13781-10098-1 13781-10097-1 13781-10096-1 13781-10095-1 13781-10094-1 13781-10093-1 13781-10023-1 13781-10022-1 13781-10021-1 13781-10020-1 13781-10017-1 13781-10016-1 13781-10015-1 13781-10014-1 13781-10013-1 13781-10012-1 13781-6047-1 13781-9930-1 13781-9917-1 13781-9928-1 13781-9925-1 13781-9924-1 13781-9923-1 13781-9922-1 13781-9835-1 13781-9834-1 13781-9833-1 13781-9832-1 13781-9831-1 13781-9830-1 13781-9829-1 13781-9827-1 13781-9818-1 13781-9780-1 13781-9779-1 13781-9778-1 13781-9777-1 13781-9775-1 13781-9774-1 13781-9773-1 13781-9772-1 13781-9771-1 13781-9770-1 13781-9728-1 13781-9688-1 13781-9715-1 13781-9714-1 13781-9713-1 13781-9712-1 13781-9711-1 13781-9710-1 13781-9709-1 13781-9696-1 13781-9695-1 13781-9694-1 13781-9693-1 13781-9692-1 13781-9691-1 13781-9690-1 13781-9687-1 13781-9686-1 13781-9342-1 13781-9319-1 13781-9019-1 13781-8910-1 13781-8732-1 13781-8712-1 13781-8310-1 13781-7897-1 13781-7895-1 13781-7835-1 13781-7798-1 13781-7797-1 13781-7758-1 13781-7757-1 13781-7756-1 13781-7755-1 13781-7667-1 13781-7399-1 13781-7398-1 13781-7397-1 13781-7396-1 13781-7395-1 13781-7394-1 13781-7393-1 13781-7389-1 13781-7388-1 13781-7387-1 13781-7386-1 13781-7385-1 13781-7383-1 13781-7187-1 13781-7186-1 13781-7185-1 13781-7184-1 13781-7181-1 13781-7023-1 13781-6399-1 13781-6389-1 13781-6388-1 13781-6387-1 13781-6386-1 13781-6379-1 13781-6378-1 13781-6377-1 13781-6375-1 13781-6214-1 13781-6172-1 13781-6155-1 13781-6154-1 13781-6122-1 13781-6120-1 13781-6118-1 13781-5800-1

On January 6, 2025, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation 24003 (PE24033) to investigate Actually Smart Summon (Summon) sessions resulting in crashes during active sessions. According to Tesla, Summon is a short-distance SAE Level 2 system, controlled by the user from a cell phone within a certain distance and intended for use in parking lots and on private property. ODI analyzed complaint data provided by Tesla as well as complaints submitted to ODI from consumers to identify Summon incidents resulting in crashes. ODI's analysis indicates that almost all Summon reported crashes involved minor property damage claims with no reported incidents involving a vulnerable road user, injury, fatality, or major property damage as indicated by an air bag deployment or vehicle tow away. Out of millions of Summon sessions, a fraction of 1% resulted in an incident. Almost all those incidents took place where, typically early in a Summon session, the system or person using the app failed to fully detect or respond appropriately to vehicle surroundings resulting in minor impacts. Incidents took place when app users did not have a complete 360-degree view of the surroundings in the app to assess situational awareness. This limited the app user’s ability to determine whether an impact was imminent during initial vehicle maneuvers such as reversing in close proximity to an obstacle or a curb. ODI found that the impacts most often occurred with parking gates, adjacently parked vehicles, and short parking bollards. During this investigation, ODI identified two Summon crashes related to camera blockages. In both crashes, Summon attempted to navigate a snowy parking lot with snow partially or fully obstructing the forward-facing cameras. Summon did not detect the camera blockage and the vehicles collided with unoccupied parked vehicles while navigating the parking lot. App users in both instances did not command a vehicle stop or pause despite the obstructed camera visible in the camera stream in the app. On January 15, 2025, Tesla released Over-the-Air (OTA) Software (SW) Update Action numbers 578998 and 579185 for vehicles in service to implement a camera blockage detection condition. Both OTAs improve camera blockage detection mechanisms. Additionally, on January 20, 2025, and January 30, 2025, Tesla identified additional system requirements associated with camera visibility checks and released OTA SW-578752 and SW-580322, respectively. These firmware updates reduce false negative camera blockage detections due to snow or condensation. In its investigation, ODI identified one Summon incident where the vehicle did not yield for a gate arm blocking a garage exit lane and the app user did not command a vehicle stop or pause, resulting in an impact. On February 6, 2025, Tesla deployed OTA SW-578839 to improve vehicle reaction to dynamic gates. This OTA update upgraded vehicle perception systems through a high-fidelity occupancy determination network, which uses data from vehicle sensory systems to improve reconstruction of field objects with high accuracy. On November 20, 2025, Tesla further improved vehicle performance by adding object detections from a separate neural network through OTA SW-580514. Owners of the affected vehicles received all six OTA SW updates. Tesla also released these SW updates to production vehicles. See online public file for detailed descriptions of all six OTA SW updates. Due to low incident occurrence and low incident severity, this preliminary evaluation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete online public file.

Traveling 35mph on local highway. Hard braking to full stop to avoid frontal collision. Upon stopping, vehicle appears to shift into reverse as I attempted to resume travel and I backed into the vehicle that had stopped short behind me. I have saved multiple video clips of the event.

NHTSA ID

11776866

Incident

Oct 26, 2026

I am submitting this complaint regarding a recurring Rear Drive Unit (RDU) failure affecting my Tesla Model Y (VIN: [XXX]). Since purchasing the vehicle in March 2025, I have experienced three separate incidents involving the same component, resulting in vehicle jerking, loss of propulsion, and unsafe driving conditions. The first failure occurred in May 2025 when the vehicle began jerking, slowing down unexpectedly, and ultimately displayed a critical warning instructing me to pull over. Tesla diagnosed the issue as a defective Rear Drive Unit and replaced it under warranty. In January 2026, the same symptoms returned. Although no alerts were initially found, a Tesla technician experienced the issue firsthand during a test drive. Tesla again determined that the Rear Drive Unit had failed and replaced it for a second time. At that point, I expressed concerns about the reliability of the vehicle and the possibility of the defect recurring. On November 7, 2026, the same issue occurred for a third time while I was driving on [XXX]. The vehicle jerked repeatedly and lost propulsion, leaving me stopped in the roadway. Fortunately, no accident occurred; however, this situation could have had serious consequences if it had happened on a busy highway or in heavy traffic. Given that the same critical drivetrain component has failed three times despite multiple repair attempts, I believe this represents a significant safety concern and an unresolved manufacturing defect. I am requesting a thorough review of the vehicle's repair history, an investigation into the root cause of these repeated failures, and consideration of an appropriate warranty remedy, including vehicle replacement. My primary concern is the safety, reliability, and long-term dependability of the vehicle, as prior repairs have not resolved the issue. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11776600

Incident

Nov 7, 2026

1. What component or system failed or malfunctioned, and is it available for inspection upon request? The windshield glass on my 2025 Tesla Model Y cracked twice. The first windshield was replaced by Tesla in March 2026 after the issue was attributed to stress. The replacement windshield cracked again in September 2026, approximately within six months. The vehicle and windshield are available for inspection upon request. 2. How was your safety or the safety of others put at risk? A cracked windshield can obstruct the driver's visibility and potentially compromise the structural integrity of the vehicle, creating a safety risk for the driver and passengers. I am concerned about the repeated windshield failures, especially because the second crack occurred shortly after Tesla replaced the original windshield. 3. Has the problem been reproduced or confirmed by a dealer or independent service center? Tesla Service inspected the original windshield in March 2026 and replaced it at no cost, identifying the initial crack as stress-related. The second crack occurred in September 2026. Tesla provided an estimate of approximately $1,400 for another replacement. I have not received a definitive technical explanation for the second crack. 4. Has the vehicle or component been inspected by the manufacturer, police, insurance representatives or others? Yes. Tesla Service inspected the vehicle when the first windshield cracked in March 2026 and replaced it due to stress. Tesla Service has also evaluated the second windshield damage and provided a replacement estimate of approximately $1,400. No police inspection has been conducted. 5. Were there any warning lamps, messages or other symptoms of the problem prior to the failure, and when did they first appear? No warning lights, dashboard messages, or other vehicle warnings appeared before either windshield cracked. Both incidents involved visible cracks in the windshield without prior warning from the vehicle.

NHTSA ID

11776583

Incident

Sep 21, 2026

I own a 2025 Tesla Model Y, currently running software version 2026.38.5.12 with Full Self-Driving (Supervised) v14.3.13. On multiple occasions while using FSD (Supervised), the vehicle has made sudden, abrupt lane changes out of the carpool (HOV) lane with little warning. This has happened repeatedly on [XXX] and [XXX] in the [XXX] area, most recently on XXX. The system initiates these exits late and aggressively, steering toward the double yellow lines that separate the HOV lane from regular traffic, and I have had to grab the wheel and take control to avoid an unsafe and illegal maneuver. I am concerned the vehicle could cross the double yellow lines into fast-moving traffic, or exit the HOV lane at a non-designated opening, creating a serious risk of collision. A driver should not have to fight the car to keep it from breaking traffic law. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11776565

Incident

Nov 6, 2026

On the evening of XXX, at my home in [XXX], my 2025 Tesla Model Y suffered a complete electrical failure that locked the vehicle with my infant son inside. When my wife went to take him out, the car would not unlock by any method. The Tesla app failed on two separate phones, the key card failed, and plugging in the vehicle did nothing. I called Tesla support and, after a long hold, reached a representative who was unable to unlock the car remotely. Tesla told us to call [XXX]. First responders arrived and could not open the doors with their techniques, so they had to break a window to get my son out. He was not injured. The vehicle is now at a Tesla service location. A vehicle that deadlocks itself while every override fails, including the manufacturer's own remote unlock, is a serious safety defect. In summer heat or a medical emergency this could have been fatal. I am asking NHTSA to investigate this failure. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11776103

Incident

Nov 5, 2026

My 2025 Tesla Model Y was driving on Full Self-Driving (Supervised) and I was supervising. The car was going about 60 to 65 MPH southbound on I-15 near Riverdale, Utah. Traffic ahead of the car in front of me had stopped, and that car, a Chevrolet Equinox, stopped for it. My car matched the speed of the car in front of it but did not slow down for the stopped traffic in time. From my dashcam video, the car eased from about 60 MPH down to 50 MPH, then braked hard and went from 50 MPH to zero in about 3 seconds, but it was not enough and it hit the rear of the Equinox at about 15 MPH. No one was hurt and no airbags went off. I was cited for following too closely, my insurance paid for the repairs, and I paid a $500 deductible. I am reporting this because the car was in control of the speed and the following distance when the crash happened. I have the dashcam video if you need it.

NHTSA ID

11775450

Incident

Sep 11, 2026

Subject: Multiple Recurring Issues — 2025 Tesla Model Y Long Range AWD I am submitting this complaint regarding multiple quality and potential safety-related issues with my 2025 Tesla Model Y Long Range Dual Motor AWD, purchased new in January 2025. 1. Persistent HVAC moldy/musty odor The vehicle develops a pronounced moldy or musty odor from the HVAC system, particularly in hot, humid, or rainy conditions. This raises concerns about possible moisture accumulation, microbial growth, or an underlying HVAC system defect. I have attempted to resolve this issue through Tesla service, including communications with the Randolph and Princeton service centers. I have experienced repeated scheduling difficulties and have not received a clear diagnosis or satisfactory resolution. I also investigated Tesla technical service information concerning HVAC inlet ductwork, including bulletin SB-26-18-002, but have not obtained a satisfactory determination regarding the applicable components on my vehicle. 2. Windshield residue affecting the front camera area I have also experienced an issue involving residue or plastic off-gassing contamination on the windshield in the area of the forward-facing camera system. This raises concerns about visibility through the camera's viewing area and the potential impact on camera-based driver-assistance functions. I have sought clarification regarding cleaning and inspection of this area. I would like this issue evaluated to determine whether the contamination is associated with an underlying vehicle material or manufacturing problem and whether it could interfere with the proper operation of safety-related camera systems. 3. Rear hatch seal and wind noise The vehicle also has a rear hatch area wind-noise issue that may be related to the hatch seal or its fitment. I am concerned about whether the seal is properly installed and functioning as intended. I would like the issue evaluated to determine whether it reflects a component, alignment

NHTSA ID

11772978

Incident

Oct 22, 2026

The contact stated that while seated in a 2025 Tesla Model Y taxi cab driving 25 MPH, the vehicle failed to yield or stop while pedestrians were nearby the vehicle. The contact stated that the failure had occurred near a school zone. The contact expressed concerns that the vehicle posed a safety risk while driving in school zones or other areas with pedestrian traffic due to the failure to yield or stop for pedestrians. The contact stated that the manufacturer should account for high-traffic areas when manufacturing self-driving vehicles.

NHTSA ID

11772929

Incident

Oct 22, 2026

On some Model Y vehicles built before February 28, 2026, the design of the HVAC inlet duct may lead to water ingress into the air filter and/or vehicle interior. If the vehicle is brought into Service for cabin air filter replacement due to a musty or moldy smell from the HVAC system, water dripping from the vents or water pooling into the RH footwell carpet, inspect the vehicle for symptoms related to the condition. If symptoms are present, replace the HVAC inlet duct with an updated part or rework the existing HVAC duct, and replace the cabin air filters.

On certain Model Y vehicles, a gap between the liftgate and the spoiler outer panel may produce a whistling sound if the vehicle is driven at high speed. Upon customer complaint of noise coming from the liftgate area, rework the spoiler outer panel.

On some vehicles, degraded or excessive glue under the front seat cushion(s) may cause creaking noises during cornering or when pressing on the seat cushion(s). Upon customer complaint, inspect the vehicle for symptoms related to the condition. If symptoms are present, rework the front seat cushion(s).

On some vehicles, insufficient lubricant at the front seat recliner tube ends may cause creaking noises during weight shifting when the seat is occupied. Upon customer complaint, inspect the vehicle for symptoms related to the condition. If symptoms are present, lubricate the front seat recliner tube ends.

Certain Model Y vehicles may emit rattling or knocking noises when driving over bumps or rough road. The condition can be improved by replacing the front upper control arm mounts, replacing the front damper assemblies, and removing the wiper bracket pencil braces. This document is for vehicles that have already had the front upper control mounts replaced and the wiper bracket pencil braces removed. Replace the front damper assemblies with updated parts.

Some Model Y vehicles may emit rattling or knocking noises when driving over bumps or rough road. The condition can be improved by replacing the front upper control arm mounts, replacing the front damper assemblies (Model Y Premium and Performance only), and removing the wiper bracket pencil braces. Inspect the vehicle for symptoms related to the condition. If symptoms are present, replace the front upper control arm mounts with updated parts, replace the front damper assemblies with updated parts (Model Y Premium and Performance only), and remove the wiper bracket pencil braces.