ELECTRICAL SYSTEM,EXTERIOR LIGHTING,VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL07/10/2026
Dealer identified Water intrusion into the rear wiring, harnesses is causing corrosion in the PIN connectors, which therefore leads to flickering tail lights which could be mis interpreted as braking or a turning. I also experienced random acceleration from slow speeds and a failure to decelerate. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
UNKNOWN OR OTHER07/07/2026
This vehicle is a BEV with regenerative braking. At various times while driving, when the regenerative braking is engaged, the brake lights illuminate to indicate to other drivers that the vehicle is slowing down. The problem is there is no indication inside the vehicle for the driver to know when the brake lights are on. This seems like a potential safety hazard. The driver can feel the effects of the regenerative braking and knows the vehicle is slowing but does not know when the slowing is enough to illuminate the brake lights.The driver's only option to ensure the brake lights are activated is to apply additional braking via the brake pedal but additional braking may not be the safest action to take in some situations. Depending on traffic, weather, and road conditions it would be safer for the driver to know when their brake lights are illuminated.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM,UNKNOWN OR OTHER,FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM07/04/2026
2023 Ford F-150 Lightning ER Platinum Ford Case Number: [XXX] VIN: [XXX] Failed: Battery overheated far beyond safety limits. No indication on dash. Safety: When it was finally checked, 3 sensors reported temps of 399, 419, and 419F. The service manager verified the temps. A photo of the diagnostic screen is available. These temps made a battery fire a significant possibility putting myself and others on the road around me in danger. The car is at the dealer in Hays, KS being looked at. There was no indication on the dashboard that there was any problem. According to information I have uncovered, these temperatures are over 3x the safety limits specified by FORD. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
EXTERIOR LIGHTING,SERVICE BRAKES06/23/2026
The driver's side rear light is full of moisture and some water. It is available for inspection. The Ford dealership in Beeville Texas Coastal Bend Ford inspected it already and informed me that it would cost $1,400 to replace and that it was only going to get worse. They also informed me that Ford allows a certain percentage of moisture and water to be in there safely. When you see the pictures this is definitely unacceptable and unsafe. This is causing the reverse lights to flicker intermittent. The moisture accumulation inside the lights can result in inoperative or flickering reverse lamp function. Inoperative reverse lamps may reduce the awareness of other motorists or road users of the driver's intention to operate the vehicle in reverse gear increasing the risk of injury or crash. I bought the vehicle from a Ford dealership in Austin Texas less than 10 days ago. I reported it to them and they stated it wouldn't be covered under warranty. The best assessment in my opinion of cause is going to be microcracks in the outer lens. Because my truck is a 2023 Ford F-150 King Ranch, and there is a known recall for the same issue for 2022-2023 Lariat and Platinum models, so this can't be a coincidence. Refer NHTSA recall number 23V-418
SERVICE BRAKES06/19/2026
I am writing to formally report a concern regarding excessive rear brake wear on my 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning. My vehicle currently has approximately 21,000 miles, and I have been informed that the rear brake pads and/or rotors require replacement significantly earlier than would be expected under normal driving conditions. Given that the F-150 Lightning utilizes regenerative braking technology, I expected brake component wear to be substantially reduced compared to conventional vehicles. Vehicle Information: Owner: [XXX] Model: 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning VIN: [XXX] Current Mileage: 21,000 miles Selling/Servicing Dealer: Shultz Ford Date of Purchase: December 2023 I am concerned that the level of rear brake wear may indicate a defect, design issue, or improper brake system operation. I respectfully request that Ford review this matter and determine whether this condition is covered under warranty, subject to a Technical Service Bulletin, or associated with any known issues affecting this model. Please advise what diagnostic steps Ford recommends and whether assistance with repair costs may be available. I would also appreciate information regarding any similar complaints, investigations, or known issues related to excessive rear brake wear on the 2023 F-150 Lightning. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and a timely resolution of this concern. Sincerely, [XXX] [XXX] [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
EXTERIOR LIGHTING06/18/2026
2023 Ford F-150 Lightning, VIN [XXX], 42,370 mi. The rear light bar has microcracks allowing moisture intrusion. Water droplets are visible inside the red lens across the tailgate and inside the white reverse lamp (photos attached, taken 5/30/2026). This is the warning condition named in recall 25SB6 (NHTSA 25V731) and predecessor 23S30 (NHTSA 23V418): water droplets in the lightbar outer lens, which can cause inoperative or flickering reverse lamps. On 6/15/2026 I took the truck to Koons Baltimore Ford, 6970 Security Blvd, Baltimore MD 21244, Advisor Rahim King, RO [XXX]. The dealer's own repair order Line B states: RECALL 25SB6 REVERSING LAMP INSPECTION, VERIFIED OPEN RECALL, at $0 warranty pay. After verifying the open recall on this VIN, the dealer still refused to replace the moisture-failed light bar under the recall. Instead, they have charged me $190 customer-pay to check and advise on water in the red bar and white reverse light, the identical defect the recall fixes for free. The dealer also tried to bill my third-party extended service plan and told me to file an auto insurance claim. All three are improper: a federal recall remedy must be provided free by the manufacturer (49 USC 30120), not charged to the customer, an insurer, or a service contract. SAFETY RISK: A truck backing up without working reverse lamps is more likely to strike a pedestrian or a child below the driver's sightline, since others are not alerted the vehicle is reversing. Reverse lamps are federally required. This failure can result in serious injury or death. REQUEST: Please document (1) the recurring light bar moisture and reverse-lamp defect, (2) the dealer's refusal to remedy a verified open recall free of charge, (3) the improper $190 diagnostic charge, and (4) attempts to shift recall cost to the customer, a service contract, and auto insurance. I can provide RO [XXX] and photos. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
POWER TRAIN,UNKNOWN OR OTHER06/16/2026
transmission failure while driving resulting in vehicle shutting down on turnpike. ford was paid to fix trans. and failed, now the vehicle sits in ford autonation margate florida. I believe there is a history of transmission issues with the 10 speed transmission, but this was unsafe . I had to coast across 4 lanes to the shoulder.
STEERING06/15/2026
The turn signal stalk on the steering column will stick after being activated. It requires a sizable amount of force to disable and turn off the turn signal, enough that there is concern of damaging the mechanism.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM06/04/2026
tried to get ford to install Heated Steering Wheel Performance Upgrade 22G06 on this and they claim the case was closed and denied because of the credit on my window sticker they closed my case ID without even notifying me about it. (Ford CASE ID for heated steering module. XXX). INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
POWER TRAIN,ELECTRICAL SYSTEM,SERVICE BRAKES06/03/2026
Ford Motor Company has failed to remedy NHTSA Safety Recall 25V863 (Ford recall number 25C69, Integrated Park Module / Park Pawl Engagement) on my vehicle within the timely manner required, and the recall remains in "Recall Incomplete" status more than four months past Ford's own stated remedy availability deadline. The recall was announced on January 26, 2026. The defect — the Integrated Park Module (IPM) failing to properly engage the Park Pawl when "P" is selected — creates a documented safety risk of roll-in-park and increased crash risk, per Ford's own filing summary as displayed on NHTSA's VIN-lookup result. At the time of the January 26, 2026 announcement, Ford stated that no remedy software was yet available and committed to a Q1 2026 remedy-availability deadline. That deadline (March 31, 2026) elapsed without a remedy being authorized. As of NHTSA's recall-data refresh on April 7, 2026, the recall remained "Recall Incomplete" on my vehicle with no remedy available. As of NHTSA's recall-data refresh on June 2, 2026 — 137 days after the original announcement and 63 days after Ford's own Q1 deadline — the recall still shows "Recall Incomplete" on my vehicle, although Ford has now (very late) authorized dealers to perform the SOBDMC (Secondary Onboard Diagnostic Module C) software update as the remedy. I am filing this complaint under the criterion explicitly published on NHTSA's VIN-lookup recall-result page: "If the manufacturer has failed or is unable to remedy this safety recall for your vehicle in a timely manner, please contact the NHTSA Vehicle Safety Hotline." The substantive concern is not that the remedy will never arrive. It is that a remedy for a documented roll-in-park crash-risk defect was not delivered within the timeline the manufacturer itself committed to, leaving my vehicle and similarly affected vehicles in an unrepaired safety-defect state through the Q2 2026 window. This is exactly the manufacturer-timeliness failure per NHTSA's guidelines
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM,SERVICE BRAKES06/03/2026
WHAT FAILED: Ford-shipped OTA software (update ID OBCC-AS.AU, "Plug & Charge Improvements," delivered May 10, 2026) generates an admitted false-positive instrument-cluster wrench-light and Ford App service-needed notification. The OTA is installed; vehicle available for inspection on request. FORD'S OWN ADMISSION (verbatim, from Ford's published OTA release note): "In some instances after this update, a 'Service vehicle soon' wrench icon may appear in your instrument cluster... You may also receive a Ford App notification indicating service is needed on the vehicle, which you can disregard. Please be assured this is a visual notification only..." SAFETY RISK: The same wrench-light is the documented symptom of NHTSA Safety Recall 25V863 / Ford 25C69 (Park Pawl engagement failure) - active and unrepaired on this VIN per NHTSA's June 2, 2026 refresh (see complaint 11741722). Ford's 25V863 NHTSA filing states a Park Pawl failure displays "A WRENCH LIGHT AND SHIFT SYSTEM FAULT MESSAGE... IN THE INSTRUMENT PANEL CLUSTER" with automatic EPB application and roll-in-park crash risk. Ford has instructed me in writing to disregard the same notification surface that would warn of a genuine 25C69 failure. The two are visually indistinguishable without dealer diagnosis. REPRODUCED/CONFIRMED: Ford itself confirms the defect in its written release note. INSPECTED: No dealer or independent inspection of this OTA-induced false-positive has occurred; Ford preemptively instructed disregard. WARNING LAMPS / FIRST APPEARANCE: The wrench-light icon and Ford App service-needed notification ARE the symptoms. They began with the May 10, 2026 OTA install per Ford's published note. Both are also the warning channels for the unrepaired 25C69 safety condition. I request ODI review of whether OBCC-AS.AU constitutes a defect under 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(11) when it masks an active federal-recall warning channel on the same VIN.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM,UNKNOWN OR OTHER06/03/2026
WHAT FAILED: Ford's recall-tracking and consumer-information system. Ford has internally inconsistent records re: Safety Recall 25V315 / 25S49 (Rear Camera Screen Software Update) on my VIN [XXX] . Vehicle and Ford-account portal available for inspection. STATUS SUBSYSTEM SAYS CLOSED: (1) Mailed "Successful OTA Update" notice received 6/1/2026 (verbatim): "the software to remedy this concern has been installed on your vehicle through a free Over-The-Air (OTA) software update, meaning the recall is now closed" (2) NHTSA database refreshed 6/2/2026: 25V315 no longer in unrepaired list (3) Ford VIN-specific recall dashboard 6/3/2026: 25S49 removed; only 25C69 remains DELIVERY SUBSYSTEM SAYS NOT DELIVERED: (4) ford.com/support/software-updates 6/2/2026: 9 of 10 expanded OTA detail cards captured, NONE references 25S49. Portal DOES show Compliance Recall 26C10 (ITRM-25.B04) with explicit completion language ("This completes Compliance Recall 26C10. No further action is required.") - proving the portal surfaces recall OTAs when they actually deploy. (5) In-vehicle SYNC Software Updates 6/2/2026: silent on 25S49. SYNC version 25221_PRODUCT Rev 2025 unchanged from 3/26/2026 despite 25S49's remedy being an APIM software update. (6) Ford MODEL-level recall page 6/3/2026 (verbatim): "Recall service not available right now. We have a remedy but parts are not available right now." SAFETY RISK: Ford simultaneously tells me the recall is closed via OTA delivered to my VIN AND publishes that the remedy parts are not yet available. Both cannot be true. Consumers cannot verify whether safety-critical recalls have been delivered. REPRODUCED/CONFIRMED: Contradiction is Ford-generated, reproducible by any reviewer. INSPECTED: No dealer or independent inspection of this discrepancy has occurred. WARNING LAMPS / FIRST APPEARANCE: Not lamp-driven. Confirmed [XXX]. I request ODI review of Ford's recall-tracking accuracy for OTA-remediated recalls. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Showing 12 of 192 complaints.
