Pickup, electric, 4WD/4-Wheel Drive/4x4, built in United States. Owner complaints on file from Feb 16, 2023 to Sep 29, 2026.
Owner complaints about this model year, by the year they were filed with NHTSA.
Owner complaints by component. Hover or focus a bar for the crash, fire, injury or death count.
Check a specific vehicle by VIN on NHTSA's site: a campaign may cover only part of a model year's production.
| Campaign | Filed | Subject | Component | Vehicles | Remedy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25V-863 | Dec 12, 2025 | Integrated park module may fail to lock into the park position when the driver shifts into park | Powertrain | 272,645 | Software update |
| 25V-731 | Oct 24, 2025 | Rear lightbar may have microcracks in the outer lens that allows moisture to accumulate, which can result in inoperative or flickering reverse lights | Lighting | 14,843 | Part replacement |
| 25V-313 | May 9, 2025 | SYNC software may fail to activate the electronic stability control (ESC) system at the beginning of each ignition cycle | Stability and traction control | 6 | Software update |
| 25V-272 | Apr 23, 2025 | Fasteners that secure the junction box bus bars inside the high-voltage battery pack may not have been tightened securely, which can cause… | Electrical system | 3 | Part replacement |
| 25V-131 | Feb 28, 2025 | Manufacturing defect in the high voltage battery cells may result in an internal short circuit | Electrical system | 950 | Part replacement |
| 24V-949 | Dec 19, 2024 | Front upper control arm ball joint nut may not have been tightened properly, allowing the front upper control arm to detach from the knuckle assembly | Suspension | 11,922 | Part replacement |
| 24V-144 | Feb 23, 2024 | Fasteners that secure the junction box bus bars inside the high-voltage battery pack may not have been tightened securely, which can cause… | Electrical system | 216 | Part replacement |
| 23V-801 | Nov 28, 2023 | SYNC software may fail to activate the electronic stability control (ESC) system at the beginning of each ignition cycle | Stability and traction control | 5,118 | Software update |
| 23V-688 | Oct 13, 2023 | Electronic cabin coolant heater module may be missing a solder joint, which can cause intermittent or no cabin heat and result in an inoperative… | Visibility and wipers | 931 | Part replacement |
| 23V-418 | Jun 9, 2023 | Rear lightbar may have microcracks in the outer lens that allows moisture to accumulate, which can result in inoperative or flickering reverse lights | Lighting | 16,375 | Part replacement |
| 23V-168 | Mar 15, 2023 | High-voltage battery pack may experience an electrical short-circuit when the battery is fully charged or near fully charged | Electrical system | 18 | Part replacement |
The full text of every complaint filed with NHTSA about this model year, newest first. Complaints are filed by owners and are not verified by NHTSA; NHTSA removes personal details before publishing.
110 complaints on file, page 1 of 6.
The vehicle's sunroof shattered spontaneously with a very loud, explosive noise similar to a gunshot. This was not an object strike, no vehicles were nearby or within 300 feet in front and nothing was overhead. The sunroof exploded upward and outward; most glass ended up in bed of the truck. The sunroof shade was drawn, so no glass fell into the cab and a small amount fell onto the sunshade. The break pattern was large, uniform, and symmetric across the sunroof, its widest point across the front edge of the sunroof. There was no warning for this at all, no noises or visual indicators that anything was wrong with the sunroof before the incident. The primary safety risk for this specific incident was the distraction and reaction to the explosive sound. If the sunshade were open, there would have been some glass coming down into the cab. The dealer investigated and confirmed it was an unusual break pattern, not necessarily what was expected from an object strike.
NHTSA complaint 11767864The high-voltage battery in my Ford F-150 Lightning is exhibiting significant degradation and erratic power availability. The vehicle will no longer charge above approximately 60% state of charge. Upon startup, available power can suddenly drop from 100% to approximately 50%, and the indicated available power continues to fluctuate unpredictably while the vehicle is being driven. I am concerned this condition could result in an unexpected reduction or loss of propulsion power while driving, creating a potential safety hazard. Car is scheduled to go to dealer on 10/8/2026.
NHTSA complaint 11766413The rear tail lights do not function. The vehicle cannot be driven at night because it has no rear illumination. It puts both the operator and other vehicles at risk of collision. I took the vehicle to a Ford dealer for repair. They reported the tail lights failed due to corrosion of the wiring harness pin connectors due to water intrusion. The wiring harness would have to be replaced at a cost of $4,375.32. I was unaware of the taillight failure until the power tailgate became inoperable. The tailgate and taillights are operated by the same wiring harness. There are no warning lamps or messages on the vehicle indicating the lights are not working. I believe this issue may be related to recall 23S30 and the harness may have been improperly connected during the initial failed recall repair.
NHTSA complaint 11766174On August 20, 2026, while driving my 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning, the vehicle suffered a sudden, complete, and catastrophic loss of propulsion. The truck stopped abruptly while in motion on an active roadway. This immediate loss of power created an extremely hazardous situation, exposing myself, my passengers, and oncoming traffic to an immediate risk of a collision. The vehicle was towed directly to Williams Ford of Binghamton (Vestal, NY), where technicians diagnosed the issue as a major component failure tied to an outstanding manufacturer safety recall. Ford recall 24S12 Positive HV battery junction box. The vehicle has been grounded at the dealership for over a week awaiting replacement safety parts from the manufacturer. This unexpected, abrupt stop constitutes a severe safety risk that renders the vehicle dangerous to operate on public roads.
NHTSA complaint 11761161While maneuvering the vehicle to park near a building, the truck unexpectedly accelerated forward and crashed into the building. I did not intend for the vehicle to accelerate into the structure. During the incident, I did not receive the expected assistance from the vehicle’s front sensing/collision-warning systems before impact. The vehicle struck the building, and no airbags deployed. Because of the nature of the incident, I am concerned about a possible malfunction involving the accelerator, braking system, electronic controls, driver-assistance systems, front sensors, or associated vehicle software. I am also aware that Ford previously issued Customer Satisfaction Program 24B56 and related Special Service Messages concerning inoperative front parking sensors on certain 2022–2024 F-150 Lightning vehicles
NHTSA complaint 11760024When i had the radio paused and not playing anything in my 2023 f150 lightning it made a loud auditory pop and one of my ears hearing got "muffled"
NHTSA complaint 11756934Dealer 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)
NHTSA complaint 11749547This 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.
NHTSA complaint 117488732023 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)
NHTSA complaint 11748315I 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)
NHTSA complaint 117451902023 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)
NHTSA complaint 11745066The 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.
NHTSA complaint 11744202WHAT 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
NHTSA complaint 11741726WHAT 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.
NHTSA complaint 11741725Ford 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
NHTSA complaint 11741722About 30 mins prior to the incident,the accelaration was vey slow getting upto only 30/35MPH Message appeared in Dash Board instructing to SCHEDULE MAITANANCE SERVICE SOON. My last service was done only 2 months ago. anyhow i decided to drive the nearest Ford Dealer. On exiting the Freeway,the ramp was downhill and the Braking System completely failed and I crashed into the pavement. All the AirBags came on. I have Sternal Contusion.
NHTSA complaint 11739960I own a 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning that is subject to an active safety recall involving electrical components and exterior lighting (potential water intrusion leading to lighting failure, including rear/reverse lamps). I was notified of the recall around October/2025 and contacted a Ford dealer shortly after. The dealer confirmed the recall is active but stated that no remedy is available. I have followed up multiple times with both the dealer and Ford corporate, and as of today, there is still no repair available and no timeline has been provided. This has persisted for approximately 6 months. Ford communicated a fix in Q1 of 2026. This defect affects critical lighting and electrical systems necessary for safe operation and visibility. Operating the vehicle under these conditions presents a safety risk. Despite this, Ford has not provided a repair, interim solution, or clear guidance. Due to the unresolved recall, I have been unable to reasonably use the vehicle. The vehicle is also used for business purposes, resulting in financial loss. I continue to incur a monthly loan obligation of approximately $2,000 while the vehicle remains effectively unusable. Ford has not offered a loaner vehicle, compensation, or alternative remedy. Complaint with Ford CXXX was submitted, with stated return calls, my repeated follow-ups, and no resolution. I am submitting this complaint to document that the manufacturer has issued a safety recall but has failed to provide a timely remedy, leaving the vehicle unusable and creating ongoing safety concerns and financial harm. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA complaint 11732080My 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning caught fire while parked in my driveway. The vehicle was NOT charging at the time of the incident. There were no warning lights, alerts, or prior mechanical issues before the fire. At the time, I was inside my home asleep when my children alerted me that the truck was “exploding.” I immediately went outside and attempted to move another vehicle and control the fire using a water hose, but the fire spread rapidly and became uncontrollable. The fire department later arrived and extinguished the fire. The vehicle was a total loss. The fire also caused: Damage to my dump trailer Damage to landscaping Damage to a wall on my property Battery-related debris and residue left on my driveway This debris is still present and I am concerned it may be hazardous, especially since I have children and a dog at home. The incident caused serious emotional distress to my family, who witnessed the fire, and significant financial loss. My insurance company (Allstate) is covering the remaining loan balance, but I am still left with financial loss from payments already made and property damage. Police report number: VV260910161 Fire department report: (pending) I have not received any communication from Ford Motor Company regarding this incident.
NHTSA complaint 11730719I own a 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning, with 48,200 miles and 2.5 years of ownership. Recently, my truck began displaying a “Powertrain / Reduced Power” warning while driving, and the air conditioning stopped producing cold air. The dealer scanned the vehicle and found DTC P0534 – A/C System Charge Loss. Further diagnostics indicated that multiple vehicle modules may require reprogramming and software updates. The dealer stated they need to evacuate and recharge the AC system, add dye, and remove front trunk components to locate the leak. This AC system is part of the high-voltage battery and eDrive thermal management system, meaning that failure of the HVAC system affects battery cooling and powertrain performance. Loss of cabin cooling is a symptom of a thermal system malfunction, which can lead to battery overheating, powertrain derating, and reduced driving performance. The combination of unexpected reduced power and loss of cabin cooling creates a safety risk, particularly during highway driving, merging, or situations requiring acceleration. These failures occurred at relatively low mileage and are associated with the high-voltage EV system, which should be functioning properly to ensure safe vehicle operation. I am submitting this complaint to report a potential safety defect with the 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning affecting the battery thermal management, high-voltage AC system, and eDrive components, which can result in sudden power loss and compromised vehicle safety.
NHTSA complaint 11728387The contact owns a 2023 Ford F-150. The contact stated that upon charging the vehicle, the charge was reduced by 40 miles. The contact stated that the vehicle failed to charge properly with a low-volume charger but charged as needed while using the high-volume charger. The contact stated that while driving 55 MPH and overtaking another vehicle, the vehicle accelerated to 65 MPH as intended, but the vehicle temporarily lost motive power. The vehicle restarted independently, and the contact was able to drive to the residence. The vehicle was towed to the dealer, where the cause of the failure was not determined. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact stated that the failure persisted. The contact was a field engineer and determined that the high voltage battery power module had failed, causing the main 12-Volt battery charging failure and a computer failure. The contact notified the dealer and the manufacturer that the high-voltage battery needed to be replaced. The contact was awaiting a response from the manufacturer. The vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 16,000.
NHTSA complaint 11709645Technical service bulletins and other notices the manufacturer sent to dealers. A bulletin is not a recall; the 60 most recent are listed.